JUDGMENT (ORAL)

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

1. Having heard Dr. Rajan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms. Richa Dhawan, learned Senior Panel Counsel for the respondents, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 8 August 2019 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal¹“the Tribunal”, hereinafter solely on the ground that the order does not address the merits of the various contentions advanced by the petitioner in the two OAs instituted by her, i.e., OA 3127/2014 and OA 507/2016, which stand decided by the said judgment.

2. In view of the order that we propose to pass, it is not necessary for us to delve deep into the facts. Suffice it to state that, primarily on the allegation that she misbehaved with her colleagues, the petitioner was visited with two charge sheets, resulting in two orders of punishment, the first dated 7 May 2013, awarding the punishment of reduction of grade pay by three years and the second dated 16 March 2015 awarding the punishment of compulsory retirement from service.

3. We have seen the OAs filed by the petitioner, which raised various grounds by way of challenge to the merits of the allegations against her.

4. However, the impu