JUDGMENT :

Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing and setting aside the order of punishment as contained in Memo No.274/Ra. Ka. dated 02.02.2010 issued by respondent No.2; whereby the petitioner was dismissed from service w.e.f. 02.02.2010. The petitioner has further assailed the appellate order as contained in Memo No.1572/Sa. Sha dated 30.12.2010, passed by respondent No.3, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed and also the order dated 04.05.2012 passed by the respondent No.4, whereby the memorial filed by the petitioner was also rejected.

3. Ms. Saumya Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner draws attention of this Court towards the appellate order (Annexure-9) and submits that the appellate authority has not given any reason, whatsoever, in spite of the fact that the petitioner has filed an extensive appeal raising several grounds before the appellate authority but the appellate authority, in a cursory manner, has rejected the appeal of the petitioner.

Ms. Pandey fairly submits the appellate authority should re-visit its order and pass a fresh order