IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 4770 of 2008. Decided on: 27.07.2010. ________________________________________________________________ Jag Mohan Chauhan. … Petitioner. Versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner. : Mr. P.P. Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondents. : Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate. Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral): Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 vide memorandum dated 27th June, 1988. He was also convicted in a criminal case registered under Sections 409 and 468 of Indian Penal Code. He was given benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act. The Divisional Manager, H.R.T.C., Shimla on the basis of the judgment of criminal Court, imposed the penalty of “stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect” upon the petitioner under Rule 19 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - The petitioner preferred an appeal against the order of disciplinary authority before the Managing Director of the respondent-Corporation. The Managing Director served the petitioner with show cause notice dated 29th October, 1996. He filed reply to the same. The appellate authority has passed the following order:- “He is reduced from Jr. Assistant (time scale of pay of Rs.1500-2700) to the minimum, i.e. Rs.1000/- of a lower time scale of pay of Rs.950-1800) (with initial start of Rs.1000/-) (initial entry grade) of a Clerk for a period of five years. It is further ordered that his post and time scale will be restored after the expiry of 5 years and he will start earning normal increments thereafter. He will not earn any increment during the pendency of reduction aforementioned.” 2. Though the petitioner has been served with show cause notice, however, the pleas/grounds taken in the reply have not been considered by the appellate authority. The purpose of issuing the show cause notice is to enable an employee to point out why the penalty be not imposed. Merely stating that the reply has been considered is not sufficient compliance of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner has suffered civil and evil consequences since the penalty imposed by the disciplinary authority has been enhanced by the appellate authority. There is violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, Annexure A-1, dated 19th November, 1997 is quashed and set aside. The appellate authority is directed to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner afresh after taking into consideration all the pleas/grounds taken by the petitioner in reply to the show cause. The needful shall be done within a - 3 - period of ten weeks from the date of supply of certified copy of this judgment. 4. Consequently, with the above observations/directions, the petition stands disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. (Rajiv Sharma), J. July 27, 2010. (sck).