1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.BASHA AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL Writ Appeal (MD)No.1519 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 S.Rajendran ... Appellant/ Petitioner Vs. 1.The Director General of Police, DGP Office, Kamarajar Salai, Chennai-4. 2.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, C.O.P.Office, Madurai, Madurai District. 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Law and Order, Madurai City, Madurai, Madurai District. 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Prohibition Enforcement Wing, Madurai City, Madurai, Madurai District. ... Respondents/ Respondents Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order of the learned Single Judge, dated 01.11.2011, made in W.P.(MD)No.12386 of 2011. Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the second respondents' proceedings made in C.No.D1 (1)/Appeal .02/2010 dated 05.3.2010 quash the same. For Appellant : Mr.R.Sundar For Respondents : Mr.R.Anandharaj, Government Advocate. JUDGMENT [Judgment of the Court was delivered BY K.N.BASHA, J] The Appellant has preferred the present writ appeal challenging the order of the Writ Court, dated https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 01.11.2011, dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging the order of the Appellate Authority, the 2nd respondent herein, dated 05.03.2010, confirming the order of punishment, dated 29.12.2009, passed by the disciplinary authority, 3rd respondent herein, imposing the punishment of postponement of increment for two years with cumulative effect. 2.Mr.R.Anandharaj, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the respondents. By mutual consent of the learned counsel on either side, the main writ appeal itself is taken up for final hearing at the time of admission itself. 3.The learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that the appellate authority has passed a non-speaking order and no reasons are assigned for rejecting the appeal preferred by the appellant, inspite of the fact that the appellant has raised several grounds in the statutory appeal preferred before the 2nd respondent. It is further contended that the appellate authority has simply stated that the appellant has not raised any fresh points and further stated that he is agreeing with the findings of the Enquiry Officer and with the punishment awarded by the disciplinary authority. It is also contended that the appellate authority has passed the impugned order in violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, it is contended that the Writ Court has simply overlooked the said points raised by the appellant and dismissed the writ petition. 4.Heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents, on the points raised by the learned counsel for the appellant. It is contended that there is no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the Writ Court. He would further point out that the appellant himself, in his explanation, has categorically and specifically admitted that he has carelessly kept the knife on the table. It is further contended that the appellant is not entitled to take a different stand while preferring the statutory appeal before the 2nd respondent. Therefore, it is contended that there is no illegality in the order passed by the 2nd respondent, namely the appellate authority. 5.We have given our careful and anxious considerations to the rival contentions put-forwarded by the counsel on either side and perused the entire materials available on record, including the order passed by the appellate authority, namely the 2nd respondent and the order of the Writ Court. 6.At the outset, it is to be stated that a perusal of the order of the appellate authority, dated 05.03.2010, makes it crystal clear that it is nothing but a cryptic and non- speaking order. It is seen that the appellate authority has simply stated that no fresh points have been raised in the appeal preferred by the appellant and further stated that the appellate authority is agreeing with the findings of the Enquiry https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 Officer. The fact remains that the appellate authority has not taken into consideration the number grounds raised in the statutory appeal preferred by the appellant. The writ Court has simply stated that the appellant has admitted his carelessness, during the course of the disciplinary proceedings and, as such, he cannot take a different stand in the statutory appeal. It is seen that the writ court has not taken note of the specific ground raised by the appellant that the appellate authority has not assigned any reason and therefore the said order is a non- speaking order. 7.In view of the said circumstances, we are of the considered view that the order of the appellate authority, namely the 2nd respondent, dated 05.03.2010, has been passed without assigning any reason and in a mechanical and arbitrary fashion and the same would amount to non-application of mind. Therefore, we set aside the order passed by the writ court and consequently the impugned order passed by the appellate authority, dated 05.03.2010. The matter is remitted back to the appellate authority for fresh consideration. The 2nd respondent is directed to reconsider the matter afresh, by taking note of all the grounds raised by the appellant in the statutory appeal, by affording an opportunity to the appellant, and pass orders in the manner known to law and on merits, by assigning valid reasons. It is made clear that the appellate authority shall not be influenced by any of the observations made by this Court in this judgment. It is further made clear that the said exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 8.The Writ Appeal is ordered accordingly. No costs. Connected M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(C.O) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Director General of Police, DGP Office, Kamarajar Salai, Chennai-4. 2.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, C.O.P.Office, Madurai, Madurai District. 3.The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Law and Order, Madurai City, Madurai, Madurai District. 4.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Prohibition Enforcement Wing, Madurai City, Madurai, Madurai District. +One Cc to Mr.R.Sundar, Advocate, SR.No.44293 +One CC to The Spl Govt. Pleader, SR.No.44590 gb rl/7c – 26.12.2011 Judgment in W.A.(MD)No.1519 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 Dated:19.12.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/