Petitioner has challenged the vires of the impugned order, dated 12-8-1999 on the ground that the impugned order was passed without reasons. He further submits that the documents of the petitioner were not considered by the Discipline Committee. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has alternative remedy before the higher forum. He further submits that the committee has passed the order after perusing the documents as is evident from para. 4 of the impugned order.
2. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record myself. The impugned order simply reveals that the learned Members have passed the order, after perusing the documents and after hearing the arguments of the parties. Learned Members did not give any reasons and discussed the evidence of the parties. It is the duty and obligation of the public functionaries to redress the grievance of the citizens with reasons, after the addition of section 24-A in the General Clauses Act as per principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 1998 SCM R 2268 (M/s. Air Port Support's case). In view of what has been discussed above, this writ petition is accepted meaning thereby the complaint filed by the petitioner before the Discipline Committee shall be deemed to be pending adjudication. Parties are directed to appear before the Discipline Committee on 7-11-2000 who is directed to decide the same afresh with reasons after providing proper hearing to all the concerned.
Disposed of with these observations.