H C RAM PHAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pleadings of the parties are complete. By consent, writ petition is placed on board and called on for hearings.

(2.) Challenge in this writ petition relates to the communication dated 27.7.1994 from the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Hissar Range, Hissar to the Superintendent of Police, Hissar (Annexure P-3). By this communication, petitioner's representation against the adverse remarks recorded for the period from 31.8.1991 to 8.12.1991 has been rejected.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that the impugned communication is a non-speaking order and the concerned authority has not considered the several contentions raised in the representation. We have heard the counsel for the parties and also perused the written statement. In our opinion, in a case of this nature where a detailed representation has made against the adverse remarks the Authority has to pass a speaking order. Having not done so, in our opinion, the impugned communication (Annexure P-3) cannot be sustained and hence quashed.