CWP(T) No. 11629 of 2008 13.04.2011 Present: Mr. G. R. Palsra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate, for the respondents. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner wherein punishment of censure and treating the period of his absence was treated as dies-non. He preferred an appeal which was summarily rejected in terms of order dated 11.12.2003 (Annexure- PI). He again preferred an appeal which also stands rejected in terms of order dated 20.3.2004 (Annexure- PJ) on the ground that the second appeal is not admissible. Be that as it may be, the fact of the matter is that order rejecting petitioner’s appeal (Annexure PI) does not assign any reasons, it is cryptic in nature and a non speaking one. 2. Consequently, as prayed for by Mr. G. R. Palsra, learned counsel for the petitioner, on this short ground alone Annexure – PI is quashed with a direction to the appellate authority to decide the appeal on merits within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. With the aforesaid directions petition stands disposed of. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. April 13, 2011 (PK)