Ajay Rastogi, J. - (1.) INSTANT petition has been filed assailing order dt.06/12/94 (Ann.14) inflicting stoppage of one annual grade increment without cumulative effect upon petitioner after holding disciplinary inquiry Under Rule 16 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 ("CCA Rules") and the order dt. 31/07/95 (Ann. 16) dismissing his appeal.
(2.) PETITIONER while working as Assistant Sadar Kanoongo in the Collectorate, Dholpur was served with memo alongwith charge sheet dt. 26/09/1992 (Ann. 7 to 9) imputing three charges. Finally, despite inquiry officer having not found either of charges proved against him, disciplinary authority held him guilty for charge No. 1 and inflicted penalty of stoppage of one annual grade increment without cumulative effect vide order dt. 06/12/1992 (Ann. 14). Charge No. 1 : Petitioner had purchased a plot in the name of his wife without informing and seeking prior approval of respondents. After regular inquiry held, inquiry officer did not find either of charges proved against him vide report dt. 23/09/93 (Ann. 11); but without serving a Note of disagreement upon him as it appears from the penalty order impugned, disciplinary authority made certain queries from inquiry officer at his own level; and finally called the petitioner for personal hearing and in absence of any disagreement Note being served, there was no occasion for the petitioner to have made any submission in course of personal hearing even if afforded. However, taking note of material on record, disciplinary authority held the petitioner guilty for charge No. 1 and inflicted penalty of stoppage of one annual grade increment without cumulative effect vide order dt. 06/12/94 (Ann. 14) - against which appeal was preferred but was dismissed vide order dt. 31/05/95 (Ann. 16).
(3.) MAIN thrust of petitioner's counsel is that in the absence of Note of disagreement being served, which is the requirement under CCA Rules, the very order inflicting impugned penalty is arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice; and deserves to be quashed & set aside. In support, Counsel has placed reliance upon judgment of this Court in Hari Narain Goyal v. State Ware Housing Corpn., 1983 RLR 520 and so also of Apex Court in Punjab National Bank v. Kunj Behari Misra : 1998(5) JT (SC) 548.;