IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 6510 of 2008 Date of Decision: 22nd April, 2010 Kartar Singh Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol,J. Whether approved for reporting1? No. For the petitioner: Mr.Dilip Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr.R.M.Bisht, Dy. Advocate General. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) The petitioner was posted in the Kandi Circle, Development Block, Sadar, Mandi, H.P. He apparently disobeyed the order passed by the Block Development Officer, Sadar, Mandi and did not assume the charge of his office at the place of posting in the circle w.e.f. 26.1.1990 upto 9.8.1990. For having disobeyed and disregarded the orders passed by the Government, disciplinary proceedings against him were initiated. On the basis of report of the Enquiry Officer vide order dated 17.5.1999 the petitioner was imposed penalty of withholding of three increments with cumulative effect. This was so done on the petitioner’s representation. Whether the reporters of Local Papers are allowed to see the Judgment? 2 Being dissatisfied with the same, petitioner preferred an appeal which stood rejected by the Appellate Authority in terms of order dated 23.8.1999, which reads as under:- “That in view of inquiry report submitted by Sub Divisional officer (Civil), Sadar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, Director Rural Development Department, Himachal Pradesh vide even no. order dated May 17, 1999 has imposed on Sh. Kartar Singh, Gram Panchayat Avam Vikas Adhikari, Development Block, Mandi Sadar, District Mandi, the penalty of withholding of three annual increments with cumulative effect. That Sh. Kartar Singh has filed appeal against the said order to the undersigned on the ground that at his level no delay has been caused in taking charge and orders of the Government have not been disobeyed and he has shown himself to be not guilty and has requested for quashing the penalty. That on perusal of the appeal submitted by aforesaid official, the inquiry report and concerned record of the matter, it is concluded that the above said Sh.Kartar Singh took seven months in obeying the Government orders from which it is clear that the above said official has been negligent in performance of his duties. Hence, I Rajwant Sandhu, Commissioner- cum-Secretary (Rural Development Department), Government of Himachal Pradesh do not find any justification for reviewing the order dated May 17, 1999 and hereby reject the appeal of Sh. Kartar Singh, Gram Vikas Avam Panchayat Adhikari.” 3 This order does not take into account the facts narrated by the petitioner in the present petition. There was an interim order of stay by the Erstwhile H.P. Administrative Tribunal which in effect had made the order of transfer in-operational. Further during this period, petitioner’s mother had been suffering from serious ailment due to which she ultimately expired. In my considered view, the order passed by the Appellate Authority is unreasoned and non speaking. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case on this short ground alone, the same is set aside. As a consequence thereof, the Appellate Authority is directed to pass a fresh order by affording adequate reasons and also opportunity of hearing/ representation to the petitioner. Needless to add, the respondent-Authority shall take into account all the attending circumstances which had prevented the petitioner from complying with the governmental order. The decision shall be taken within a period of four months from today. With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of. 22nd April, 2010 (Sanjay Karol) (C) Judge. 4