- (1.) Heard Sri Siraj Uddin Khan, the petitioner, in person and Sri Saurabh Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondents. In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 11.11.2013 passed by the Appellate Authority and the orders dated 14.5.2009 and 26.6.2012 passed by the Disciplinary Authority.
(2.) Sri Siraj Uddin invites the attention of this Court to the order dated 2.9.2013 passed in Writ-A No. 43900 of 2013 wherein this Court directed the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal of the petitioner in accordance with law by a speaking and reasoned order. Pursuant to the aforesaid order the Appellate Authority passed the impugned order dated 11.11.2013 is under: "I find that the order of Disciplinary Authority is well reasoned and logical and Penalty imposed on Shri S.U. Khan is reasonable and commensurate with the gravity of misconduct committed by him. I find no reason to interfere with the order dated 26.2.2012 of the Disciplinary Authority. Therefore, in exercise of powers conferred on me, I reject the appeal dated 19.2.2013 preferred by Shri S.U. Khan in terms of Rule 37(2) of GI (CDA) Rules, 1975 and confirm the order dated 14.5.2009 of Disciplinary Authority."
(3.) Apparently the impugned appellate order cannot be said to be a speaking and reasoned order. It merely says that there is no reason to interfere with the order dated 26.6.2012 of the Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority, by the order dated 26.6.2012 awarded punishment merely observing that "I concurred with the findings of the Inquiry Officer and accept the same and thus hold Sri S.U. Khan, Assistant (T), Branch Office, Jaunpur guilty of the charge leveled against him.";