CWP No.3666 of 2009.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.3666 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.04.2010 **** Ramesh Kumar . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab and others . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Manu K. Bhandari, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Charu Tuli, Sr. DAG, Punjab ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner is serving as ASI (ORP) in the Punjab Police. Vide an order dated 04.08.2005 (Annexure P8), respondent No.2 – the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Ludhiana Range, Ludhiana imposed the punishment of forfeiture of three years service with permanent effect for the purpose of increment(s). CWP No.3666 of 2009.doc - 2 – (2). Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred a departmental appeal (Annexure P11) under the statutory Rules before respondent No.1 – the Director General of Police, Punjab, who has rejected the same by passing the following order:- CWP No.3666 of 2009.doc - 3 – xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 2. The appeal submitted by ASI/ORP Ramesh Kumar No.43/R (151/LDH) against the order of forfeiture of three years approved service has been considered and rejected. The petitioner may be informed accordingly. The following record is returned herewith. a. D.E. File page 1-194 b. Fauji Missal page 1-330 Sd/- For Director General of Police, Punjab” xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx (3). I have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and perused the record. (4). In my considered view, it is imperative upon the Appellate Authority while deciding a statutory appeal, to broadly deal with the contentions raised by an appellant and support its conclusions with valid reasons. No such exercise appears to have been undertaken vide the impugned order dated 07.12.2007 (Annexure P12), which is totally cryptic and non-speaking. (5). For the reasons afore-stated, the writ petition is allowed in part; the impugned order dated 07.12.2007 (Annexure P12) is set aside and the Director General of Police, Punjab is directed to re-consider and dispose of CWP No.3666 of 2009.doc - 4 – the petitioner’s appeal by passing a speaking order, preferably by giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (6). Ordered accordingly. (7). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 27.04.2010 vishal shonkar