( 1. ) THIS appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been preferred by the appellant-plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated 18-2-1969 passed by the Additional District Judge, Ambikapur, in civil Appeal No. 61-A of 1967.

( 2. ) BRIEF facts leading to the present appeal are that the appellant plaintiff, s. C. Rai, was Circle Organiser, Tribal Welfare Department, and posted at kusami, district Sarguja, in the year 1957. He was transferred to Balrampur by an order dated 25-6-1957 against which he made a representation which was rejected on 18-7-1957. He was asked to hand over charge by an order dated 31-8 1957, but he did not do so. A departmental enquiry was then instituted against him on certain charges and he was suspended by an order dated 24-9-1957 (Ex. P-8) with immediate effect. This order of suspension was passed by the Collector, Surguja. It was during the pendency of the suspension, the appellant-plaintiff handed over charge of his office on 6-11-1957. Then, the earlier order of suspension was modified and was given retrospective effect from 17-8-1957 vide order dated 6-1-1958 (Ex. P-14 ). Ultimately, in the enquiry, respondent No. 2 (Director of Tribal Welfare, M. P.) held the charges to have been proved against the appellant-plaintiff and passed an order (Ex. P-22) dated 5-12-1959 imposing on him a punishment to the effect that the period of suspension already undergone by him be treated as punishment and it was. further ordered that he would only be entitled to suspension allowance for the entire period of his suspension which he has already drawn and not to full pay and allowances. In that order, another enquiry was ordered to be instituted against the appellant-plaintiff on different grounds. Thereafter, the appellant-plaintiff filed an appeal which was heard by the same officer, though in a different capacity, as Secretary to Government, Tribal Welfare Department, and the same was rejected vide order dated 29-8-1961 (Ex. D-20 ). Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the appellant-plaintiff filed the present suit after service of notice under section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure for declaration that the order dated 5-12-1959 (Ex. P-22) passed by the respondent No. 2 (Director of Tribal welfare) and the other respondent No. 1 (State of M. P.) in appeal dated 29-8-1961 (Ex. D-20) were void and inoperative and in consequence he claimed further relief of arrears of pay and allowances amounting to Rs. 2,034. 10 np. together with interest.

( 3. ) THE suit was contested by the respondent-defendants.

( 4. ) THE trial Court on the basis of the evidence on record held that the punishment awarded to the appellant-plaintiff could not be awarded under the provisions of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1955 and as such the order (Ex. P-22) dated 5-12-1959 was illegal and void to the extent it imposed the punishment. But so far as it related to the reinstatement of the appellant-plaintiff, the said order was held to be good. Further, it was held that the appellate order dated 29-8-1961 (Ex. P-20) was bad as the appeal was heard by the same person who passed the order of punishment. In the instant case, Shri T. N. Bahal first passed the order dated 5-12-1959 (Ex. P-22)in the capacity of Director, Tribal Welfare, and later he also heard the appeal against that order himself as Secretary to Government, Tribal Welfare Department. Accordingly, it decreed the claim of the appellant-plaintiff for arrears of salary for the period 17-8-1957 to 6-12-1959 as claimed in the plaint. In appeal, preferred by the respondent-defendants, the lower appellate Court partly allowed the same and held that out of the total claim for arrears of pay except for two months, i. e. , November and December, 1959, the rest of the claim was time barred under Article 102 of the Limitation Act, 1908. The finding of the Trial Court that the orders dated 5-12-1959 (Ex. P-22) and 29-8-1961 (Ex D-20) we