Govind Mathur, J. - (1.) Under a memorandum dated 2.4.2004 a disciplinary action was initiated against the petitioner as per Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958. ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...
(2.) The disciplinary authority after receiving the report of Enquiry Officer and the record of enquiry by notice dtd. Nil (Annex.4) called upon the petitioner to explain the circumstances appearing against him in the enquiry report. A detailed explanation was submitted by the petitioner on 19.11.2004, raising several objections about the fairness of enquiry. The disciplinary authority vide order dated 18.12.2004 held the petitioner guilty for all the charges of misconduct and imposed a penalty of dismissal from service upon him. While doing so, the disciplinary authority at the first quoted the charges levelled against the petitioner, re-produced the findings given by the Enquiry Officer and the explanation submitted by the delinquent employee. The disciplinary authority then recorded his conclusion in the following terms : ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...
(3.) As per Rule 23 of the Rules of 1958, the petitioner preferred an appeal to question validity, propriety and correctness of order dated 18.12.2004 and that came to be allowed in part vide order dated 31.10.2005. The appellate authority found the enquiry laconic as an opportunity of cross-examination was not accorded to the delinquent, but relying upon the report of preliminary enquiry, held the petitioner guilty. The appellate authority modified the penalty and substituted the penalty of stoppage of three annual grade increments with cumulative effect instead of dismissal from service.;