SHAMSHER SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has come up with a prayer to quash the impugned order dated December 9, 1994 imposing the punishment of curtailing 25% of his pension after holding him guilty of the charges and the order dated April 5, 1995 dismissing his appeal preferred against the aforesaid order as contained in Annexures-XI and XVI respectively to this writ petition.

(2.) Having heard Sri Kauser, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Sri P.K. Bisaria, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents at length, we are of the view that this writ petition, in the interest of justice, has to be allowed in part, as the appeal is required to be disposed of afresh for the reasons stated as under :

(3.) Eight charges were framed against the Petitioner, which were found to be proved by the Inquiring Officer. His report was considered, accepted and the order dated December 9, 1994 was passed. From a perusal of the impugned appellate order it transpires that the Appellate Authority noted 13 grievances raised by the petitioner before it. One of the grievances, as noted by the Appellate Authority itself reads thus: (In English translation)