1 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9646/2009 Vijay Shanker Maru. vs. State of Rajathan & Ors. Date : 12.10.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.N Trivedi, for the petitioner. - - - - - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner preferred an appeal to challenge the order dated 27.9.84 whereby he was punished with penalty of stopping of two annual grade increments with cumulative effect. The petitioner preferred appeal as back as on 5.12.84. The only contention of the petitioner is that the appeal has not yet been decided. It is strange that the appeal may have been pending since 1984 till 2009. Therefore, in the circumstances, it will be appropriate to direct the respondents straightway to decide the appeal of the petitioner if has not yet been decided and communicate the order to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In case, the appeal has already been decided, 2 then, it may be communicated to the petitioner that the appeal has been decided as well as the copy of order passed by the appellate authority. It is made clear that in case, the appeal has already been decided by the appellate authority, then this order will not be a ground vbgfor reopening of the decided issue, decided by the appellate authority which may have been decided long ago. With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of and the respondents may comply with the above order within the time referred above looking to the fact that the issue is old one of the year 1984. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya