HARINANDAN SHARMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order of punishment dated 30.10.1993 visiting him censure for the year 1987 -1988 and that nothing beyond subsistence allowance was payable for the period of suspension. He is also aggrieved by the appellate order dated 27.4.2002 by which the punishment has been affirmed. Learned Counsel submits that the petitioner was issued a show cause notice on 22.5.1993, to which he replied on 6.10.1993.

(2.) THE short submission on behalf of the petitioner is that there has been no consideration of the cause shown by him in the order of punishment dated 30.10.1993. The appellate order was non -speaking and unreasoned.

(3.) THE punishment imposed on the petitioner is minor in nature under Rule 55A of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules. All that it required is a show cause notice and proper consideration of the cause shown leading to the orders of punishment. Such orders, primarily administrative in nature, are amenable to judicial review. If an order is amenable to judicial review, it has to be reasoned disclosing the materials that were considered, the reasoning passing through the mind of the authority to arrive at a conclusion, to enable the Court to review it. Reasons are the very foundation and heart of the order. In absence of reasons, the order becomes arbitrary. It is this reason which also gives satisfaction to the delinquent that he has had a fair opportunity, that his defence was properly considered, that he was unfortunate that he could not get relief in law.