The main legal point established is that the appellate authority cannot impose a major penalty without conducting a proper inquiry under R.14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965.

1. The petitioner, while he was working as a Sorter, SRO Cannanore, was served with a memorandum dated 16-2-1971 issued by the 1st respondent, the Senior Superintendent, R MS, Ernakulam Division, copy of which is Ext. P1, informing him that it was proposed to take action against him under R.16 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (the Rules); it was alleged in the statement of imputations of misconduct or misbehaviour enclosed, that the petitioner while working as Head Sorter, Cannanore Sorting/2 on 15-12-1970, had exhibited utter indifference, gross negligence and lack of devotion to his duties in that (i) he had furnished incorrect information in his daily report suppressing facts; (ii) he had failed to maintain discipline inside the office; (in) he had furnished false information to the police; and (iv) he had demanded false reasons from Sri. Karunakaran for being relieved for getting medical aid. Ext. P2 is the copy of the representation dated 27-2-1971, denying the charges levelled against him, submitted by the petitioner. Ext. P3 is the copy of the memorandum dated 26-3-1973 issued by the 1st respondent informing the petitioner that an enquiry was proposed to be held to go into the articles of charge stated in Annexure-I thereto. Ext. P3(a) is the copy of the addendum dated 27-4-1973 adding the following to Ext. P3 memorandum dated 26-3-1973:

"This memo is issued in pursuance of Sub Rules (3) to (23) of R.14 of the CCS. (CC&A) Rules. 1965 as laid down in R.16 (b) of the said Rules, in respect of the charge sheet issued in this office memo of even No. dated 16-2-1971."

Exts. P4, P5 and P6 dated respectively 1-5-1973,1-5-1973 and 1-9-1975 are copies of proceedings relating to the appointment of the enquiry officer, and the officer presenting the case before the enquiry officer. Ext. P7 is the copy of the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 29-6-1978 imposing on the petitioner the "penalty of postponement of his next increment due on 1-6-1979 for a period of thirty months without cumulative effect", accepting, after having discussed the evidence on record, the finding entered in the enquiry proceedings dated 1-3-1978, a copy of which is Ext. P8, submitted by the enquiry officer appointed as per Ext P5 proceeding. Ext. P9 is the copy of the appeal filed by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent, the Appellate Authority, (the Director of Postal Services, Kerala Circle, Trivandrum); and Ext. P10 is the copy of the order dated 30-3-1979 by which the 2nd respondent disposed of Ext. P9 appeal filed by the petitioner. After having discussed in Para.3 to 7 of Ext. P.10 order the grounds raised in Ext. P 9 appeal, the 2nd respondent towards the end of Para.7 held as follows:

"...Judging from the available evidence I have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that all the articles of charge framed against the appellant are fully established and that the disciplinary authority was quite correct in coming to the finding, based on the evidence adduced in the enquiry, that the charges against the appellant were all proved."

Thereafter, in Para.8 of Ext. P 10, the 2nd respondent has discussed whether the penalty inflicted by the Ist respondent in and by Ext. P 7 proceedings was adequate, inadequate or excessive; towards the end of the paragraph he has recorded his conclusion as follows:

"I am of the view that a major statutory penalty is fully justified to be imposed on the appellant. In as much as an oral enquiry in accordance with the provisions of Sub-rules (3) to (23) of R.14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 has been held in the disciplinary proceedings taken against the appellant it is quite clear that the appellant has been given adequate and reasonable opportunity, and for imposing a major penalty it is not necessary to hold any further enquiry. It may also be mentioned that in view of the amendment of R.15 (4) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 by a notification as issued in Memo N