1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3284 OF 2009 ... Hisamuddin Abdul Rahim Kazi...Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and others ...Respondents ... Mr.V.S.Rajguru for the Petitioner. Mrs.S.S.Bhende,AGP for State. ... CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH, & K.K.TATED, JJ DATED:10th December, 2009 P.C.: 1. The Petitioner was in the service of the Government of Maharashtra as Police Sub- Inspector. A departmental inquiry was initiated against him and punishment of compulsory retirement was imposed on him. He 2 filed an appeal against that conviction under Rule 15 of the Bombay Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rule, 1956. That appeal was dismissed. The Petitioner challenged that order before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. The Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal also dismissed the original application. Therefore, Writ Petition No.1820 of 2000 was filed in this court. That Writ Petition was decided by the Division Bench of this Court by order dated 12th August, 2005. This court found that the Appellate authority has not decided the Appeal in compliance with the provisions of Rule 15 of the Bombay Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rule, and therefore remitted back the proceedings to the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority has decided the appeal by order dated 30th August, 2007. The grievance of the Petitioner against that order is that the 3 Appellate Authority has not again followed the provisions of Rule 15 of the Rules in deciding the appeal. Therefore, he approached the M.A.T. by filing Original Application No.527 of 2008. The principal grievance in that application was that the Appellate Authority has not complied with the order of this court and has not considered the appeal as required by the provisions of Rule 15. The M.A.T., however, dismissed the original application and therefore the Petitioner is before us again making the same grievance that his appeal has not been decided in compliance with the provisions of Rule 15. Rule 15 reads as under: 15. The Appellate Authority shall consider the following aspects:- (a) Whether the facts on the basis of which the order has been passed are established or not; 4 (b) Whether the facts which are established support adequately the punishment imposed; and (c) Whether the punishment imposed is execessive or adequate and in case the authority deems it fit, it may direct the officer passing the order to hold a further enquiry into one or specified points and thereafter pass appropriate and just order which will include the order of enhancing the punishment or imposing further severe punishment. Provided that in the event the punishment is to be enhanced in the appeal or if further severe punishment is to be imposed, the same will not be done except after issuing the show cause notice to the appellant and without considering the cause shown by him. 2. Perusal of the above Rule shows that first the Appellate Authority has to consider the facts which led to the passing of the order imposing punishment. Perusal of the order dated 30th August, 2007 shows that it does not even mention the misconduct which was alleged against the Petitioner and for which a departmental inquiry was held. 5 Obviously, therefore, the order of the Appellate Authority does not comply with Clause (a) of Rule 15. Clause (b) of Rule 15 requires the Appellate Authority to consider whether the facts which are established support adequately the punishment imposed. Perusal of the order of the Appellate Authority dated 30th August, 2007 shows that again the material that has come before the inquiry officer is not considered with reference to the punishment imposed. Clause (c) of Rule 15 requires the Appellate Authority to consider whether the punishment imposed is excessive or adequate. Perusal of the order dated 30th August, 2007 shows that this aspect of the matter has also not been considered. Perusal of the order of the Appellate Authority dated 30th August, 2007 shows that only operative paragraph is paragraph 3 of the order. Only thing that is 6 considered in that paragraph is that the punishment imposed on the Petitioner was considered by the Appellate Authority already in the appeal and that the decision to dismiss the appeal was taken after examining the record, and there is no material to show that there is any room to revise or modify that decision. In our opinion, this cannot be said to be in compliance with the Rule 15 which was insisted upon by this court by its order in Writ Petition No.1820 of 2000. In these circumstances, as we find that the order of the Appellate Authority dated 30th August, 2007 was made without complying with the order made by this court, that order will have to be set aside. 3. In the result, therefore, petition succeeds and is allowed. Order dated 30th 7 August, 2007 passed by the Appellate Authority and the order passed by the M.A.T. in Original Application No.527 of 2008 are set aside. The Appeal of the Petitioner is remitted back to the Appellate Authority directing the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal strictly in accordance with Rule 15 quoted above. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (K.K.TATED, J.)