"10. This Court considered the rival submissions of the learned counsels and perused the materials and pleadings placed on record. This Court finds that there is considerable force in the contention putforth by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there has been a complete violation of the procedure contemplated in the rules, while the administration had initiated the major penalty proceedings against the petitioner which mandate following the procedure in all respects in strict sense. In the instant case, unfortunately, the enquiry officer has held the charges proved without any iota of evidence let in in the enquiry and such findings, which this Court can safely construe that as one of perverse finding. Admittedly, no witnesses were examined nor documents were marked in the enquiry and in such an event, the findings cannot have any legal sanctity, which can be held against the petitioner. However, the disciplinary authority, who is vested with the responsibility and exercising quasi judicial power cannot abdicate his responsibility of addressing the issues raised by the petitioner in his explanation to the enquiry report. But, in the instant case, he has chosen to ignore the same and slapped the petitioner with the major penalty of removal from service. The disciplinary authority's impugned action therefore cannot be countenanced both in law and on facts. Further, adding to the defective proceedings by both the enquiry officer and the disciplinary authority, the appellate authority has passed a non-speaking order in total violation of the rule provision as according to Rule 27 of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, he is expected to consider each and every objection and apply his mind but in the instant case, there appears to be no application of mind at all. Moreover, as
