The Madhya Pradesh High Court has set aside an order withholding 50% of a government employee’s pension, holding that the disciplinary authority imposed the penalty without showing it had considered his defence.
Justice Anand Singh Bahrawat heard the employee’s challenge to a disciplinary order dated 15 October 2025 and a later appellate order that upheld the same punishment. The penalty followed a departmental inquiry that found the charges against him proved. The employee had filed a detailed 17-page reply to the chargesheet and the inquiry report on 5 August 2025.
The court found that the final order did not demonstrate that the points raised in that reply had been examined before the penalty was fixed. It ruled that authorities exercising quasi-judicial powers must pass speaking orders, meaning orders that record the reasons behind them.
“Providing justifications in an appellate order cannot cure an initial lack of reasoning,” the court held, adding that basic procedural fairness has to be met at the first stage and not repaired later on appeal.
The court quashed both the original penalty order and the appellate order and directed the disciplinary authority to re-examine the employee’s written response and pass a fresh, reasoned order.
