promoting the petitioner early next year, and
by antedating his promotion.
out to the Gomuor.
We might point this
19/12/39.
11. Duncan.
The
statement in hoa. 3
despatch in
rather
uddled,
int
I do not
know of any
rearm why
Sween
ithe
ust
ni
such a
care
from the
Conclusion
that
an
officer's
basis of
wis
Lam
been
conduct (on the
am admissions)
upuhensible, and administer
Evidently the
a uprins and.
Gw.did
not reyard
thuis
as constitutning
"punishment"
at all,
or he would
have
(CR 65- "formerly, CRS1)
been bound to upnt it ģ
the 5.os. as the time. Commu
sense supports his view. It
umula
be
aburd
of the Col.
Reps.
were interpreted as
2
Pag
Pag
that worry
requiring that
Case
in which
an office
chawing over
2200
да
year
be
the
subject of a
is told off should
juce uport
the S. of S. орб
Even a
stophage
of increment,
which is
u d
W
serive for the
office than
a reprimand, is not invariably
reported.
"
seems to me
to we
genią two fou
Day
при
that the You.
was
arany
reprimand the petitimes.
Я
will be wrough
от гра
Mopored
in Lloyd.
2. Fot. Kang.I
27.12.88.
Coque DEA
3/1/40
atowce
9
५०.
e 9
e 9
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.