MADAN B. LOKUR, J.

The two principal issues that arise for our consideration relate to the interpretation of the proviso to Rule 9(2)(a) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 and the validity of a non-speaking order passed by a disciplinary authority pursuant to a departmental disciplinary inquiry.

In our opinion, the proviso to Rule 9(2)(a) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 does not obligate the President or the disciplinary authority of a delinquent official to supply to him the report of the findings of the disciplinary authority before a final decision is taken by the President on the inquiry report in a departmental disciplinary proceeding. We are also of the opinion that, in law, a disciplinary authority is obliged to give reasons for taking an adverse decision against a delinquent official and imposing a penalty on him.

th

2. The Petitioner is aggrieved by a common order dated 27May, 1999 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench in OA Nos. 22/1993 and 3310/1992.

3. The Petitioner was subjected to two departmental disciplinary enquiries by the Respondents on the basis of two charge-sheets issued to him under Rule 14 of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document