In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... C.W.P. No.8547 of 2008 ..... Date of decision:20.5.2008 Jagbir Singh .....Petitioner v. Food Corporation of India and others .....Respondents .... Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.S. Saron Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohinder Pal Present: Mr. B.R. Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... S.S. Saron, J. (Oral): This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking directions to respondent No.4 to decide the appeals Annexure-P.6 to Annexure-P.10 against the penalty orders passed by respondent No.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that in similar circumstances, this Court vide order 23.4.2008 (Annexure-P.12) has disposed of the petition with the direction to respondent No.3 to take a final decision on the appeal expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. After giving our thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that there is no data with the petitioner or with this Court to show how many cases are pending before respondent No.4 and what is the seniority position of the petitioner's appeal before respondent No.4. There C.W.P. No.8547 of 2008 [2] may be other employees of the Food Corporation of India whose appeals have been filed before that of the petitioner. Besides, the order dated 23.4.2008 (Annexure-P.12) on which reliance is placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner does not provide any ratio for issuance of similar directions. However, it may be noticed that the petitioner is due to retire next year on superannuation. In the circumstances, we feel that the petitioner should approach the Managing Director, Food Corporation of India (respondent No.4) in the first instance and submit his grievance before the said authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that a legal notice dated 3.2.2008 (Annexure-P.11) has already been served for deciding his appeal. In our view, the issuance of legal notice may not entirely be the proper course to be followed for disposing of appeals before quasi-judicial authorities. Besides, the said legal notice has been issued to respondents No.1, 3 and 4 whereas the appeal is to be decided by respondent No.4 only. In the circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition and the petitioner may approach respondent No.4-Managing Director, Food Corporation of India seeking early hearing of his appeal. ( S.S. Saron) Judge May 20, 2008. (Mohinder Pal) Judge *hsp*