IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 15048 of 2008. Decided on: 01.07.2010. _____________________________________________________ Prakash Singh. … Petitioner. Versus HIMUDA. … Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. Umesh Suman, Advocate vice Mr. P.P. Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. C.N. Singh, Advocate. Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral): Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner vide memorandum dated 24.10.2005 (Annexure A-2) under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965. Inquiry Officer was appointed. He furnished his report to the disciplinary authority. The disciplinary authority imposed the penalty of ‘censure’ upon the petitioner vide order dated 18.12.2006. This order is appealable. However, the petitioner has not filed any appeal against this order. In the interest of justice, the petitioner is permitted to prefer an appeal against order dated 18.12.2006 to the appellate authority within a period of 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - three weeks from today. Thereafter, the appellate authority shall decide the same by a speaking order within a period of ten weeks after the production of certified copy of this judgment. Before parting with the judgment, it is made clear that the ground of limitation shall not come in the way of the petitioner. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. July 01, 2010. (sck).