AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R.S. Garg, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
The Petitioner has been awarded penalty under annexure-6, being aggrieved by the said order he took up the matter in appeal before the Director (R) who also acted as the appellate authority. By the appellate order dated 26.2.2004 (annexure-8) the appeal has been dismissed observing that the contentions and arguments raised by the Petitioner in his appeal are not tenable and are without any material fact which may warrant review of the order passed by the preliminary authority.
In the opinion of this Court, the order contained in annexure-8 cannot be termed to be a legal order. An order of the appellate authority must be self-contained. From the order itself it must appear that what were the charges levelled, what were the findings of the sub-ordinate authority, on what grounds the Appellant was challenging the findings and for what particular reasons the appellate authority was declining to interfere in the matter. As the order in question does not show application of mind and is cryptic in nature, it cannot be allowed to stand. The said order is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted to the appellate authority to decide the appeal afresh in accordance with law and observation made aforesaid.
It is further directed that during the pendency of the appeal no recovery shall be made from the Petitioner. If the Petitioner wants a personal hearing then the personal hearing should be afforded to him and if he wants to place some more grounds in support of his appeal then those should also be taken into consideration.
It goes without saying that the advance copy of such argument or the grounds shall be supplied to the Management enabling them to meet the grounds.
The petition to the extent indicated above is allowed.