CWP(T) No.7611 of 2008 05.05.2009 Present: Mr. D.P. Gupta, Advocate vice Mr. K.D. Shreedhar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General for the respondents. The adverse remarks were recorded in the Annual Confidential Report of the petitioner for the period from 1.4.1997 to 31.3.1998. He made a representation to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Southern Range against these adverse remarks on 11.5.1999. However, the appeal/representation made by the petitioner was rejected by the Deputy Inspector General of Police on 22.6.1999. The Deputy Inspector General of police had not taken into consideration the grounds mentioned in the appeal. He was bound to take into consideration the grounds mentioned in the appeal. Moreover, the order dated 22.6.1999 is a non-speaking order. The petitioner had also preferred a further appeal to the Director General of Police. He had also rejected the same without a speaking order. He was bound to take into consideration the points raised by the petitioner in his representation dated 23.7.1999. It is settled law by now that any order which has civil consequences must be self- contained, speaking and reasoned. Accordingly, the petition is allowed, Annexure A-5 dated 22.6.1999 and Annexure A-7 dated 2.8.2000 are quashed and set aside. The Appellate Authority is directed to re-hear the appeal preferred by the petitioner. The petitioner shall also be heard in person by the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority shall pass a speaking order. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), J. May 05, 2009. (rkv)