Appeal cannot be dismissed by a non-speaking order.

(Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issue of a Writ of Certiorari to quash the punishment of reduction in petitioner's pay scale by three stages for three years with cumulative effect passed by the second respondent herein in his P.R.No.297/94/K1 dated 26.5.1995 and further confirmed by the first respondent herein in his C.No.B2/Appeal No.105/95 dated 29.9.1995 with all consequential monetary benefits.)

The petitioner was issued with a charge memo dated 7.11.1994, primarily accusing him of insubordination and abusing his superior Officer and acting in a manner unbecoming of a Government Servant. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 11.3.1995. An enquiry followed and the enquiry officer submitted a report dated 28.3.1995 in his minute in PR No.297/94 holding the charge proved.

2. After furnishing a copy of the enquiry report and receiving further representation of the petitioner, the second respondent herein passed final orders on 26.5.1995, imposing the penalty of reduction in the time scale of pay by three stages for three years with cumulative effect.

3. Aggrieved by the said order of penalty, the petitioner filed an appeal to the first respondent on 7.7.1995. The said appeal was rejected by the first respondent by an order dated 29.9.1995. Challenging the said order, the petitioner filed O.A.No.1520 of 1996 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. On the abolition of the Tribunal, the said application has been transferred to this Court in W.P.No.18827 of 2006.

4. I have heard Mr.S.Ravi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.V.Arun, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

5. Though the order impugned in the writ petition is attacked on several grounds such as perversity of findings and the lack of sufficient opportunities to defend himself in the enquiry, I do not wish to go into those questions, in view of the short ground on which the writ petition could be disposed of.

6. It is seen from the order passed by the Appellate Authority dated 29.9.1995 that it was a laconic non-speaking order. After extracting the charge, the Appellate Authority has passed an order running to about three lines and the operative portion of the said order reads as follows:-

"I have carefully gone through the Appeal petition, PR file and connected records. The delinquency committed by the delinquent in discipline force requires serious punishment. Hence, there is no need to interfere the punishment already awarded. The appeal is rejected."

7. It is seen from the aforesaid portion of the impugned order that the Appellate Authority did not deal with any of the grounds of appeal raised by the petitioner. A departmental appeal is a continuation of the original proceedings. It is needless to point out that the last opportunity available for a delinquent, to canvass his case on merits, is at the appellate stage. After the appeal, a delinquent loses his right to challenge any disciplinary proceedings on merits, since the scope of interference on a revision or on a writ petition is very limited. Therefore, the rules themselves contemplate appellate authorities to go into the factual details and consider all the grounds of appeal before deciding an appeal. Unfortunately, the first respondent has chosen to dismiss the appeal by a non-speaking order and hence the appellate authorities order is liable to be set aside.

8. A similar question came up for consideration before this Court in Arokiadoss vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Law and Order (South), Madras-8 and Another (1989 Writ L.R. 274). In the said case also, an identical order similar to the one involved in the present case was passed by the Appellate Authority. Therefore, after considering the scope of the powers conferred upon the Appellate Authority, this Court held as follows in paragraph-3:-

"R.6(1) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 reads as follows