SHARMA, J. - (1.) WITH the consent of learned counsel for parties the matter has been taken up for final disposal.
(2.) THE prayer of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is as under:- (i) to quash and set aside the charge sheet dated March 2, 1998, punishment order dated April 3, 1998 and the appellate order dated September 18, 2001; (ii) to direct respondents to provide all consequential benefits to the petitioner as if punishment was never awarded; Contextual facts depict that the petitioner was appointed as Excise Inspector Gr. II on July 26, 1996 on probation for a period of two years. The petitioner joined his duties in Excise Circle Hanumangarh on September 26, 1996. The petitioner remained on leave from December 1, 1996 to December 16, 1996 (fifteen days) and from December 17, 1996 to January 3, 1997 (eighteen days ). The circular dated May 18, 1987 has been issued whereby the target of cases has been fixed in Circle `a' and `b' for essentially registering the excise cases 6 and 4 per month. Failing which the Inspector is liable for disciplinary action under Rule 17 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeals) Rules, 1958 (for short `cca Rules' ). As in the year 1996-97 the petitioner registered only 3 cases, as against 36 cases, the charge sheet was issued on March 2, 1998. The petitioner submitted reply and stated that almost after lapse of six months of the financial year he was appointed and for about 45 days he had to remain on leave, therefore he could not register the required cases. Without properly considering the reply of petitioner the respondents imposed on him the punishment of stoppage of one annual grade increment without cumulative effect vide order dated April 3, 1998. The appeal against the punishment order came to be rejected vide order dated September 18, 2001. Therefore, the petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition. The respondents in their written statement raised preliminary objections as to the maintainability of writ petition on the ground of delay and alternative remedy. I have heard the submissions and scanned the material on record. In my opinion fixing a quota by the Excise Department for registering of minimum criminal cases cannot be held to be reasonable. In order to avoid punishment an Officer may falsely implicate innocent persons. In a similar situation the Division Bench of this Court in State of Rajasthan and Others vs. Lala Ram (1), observed in para 15 thus:- " 15. We are, therefore, of the opinion that aforesaid procedure by which the practice of subjecting a person for disciplinary proceedings for punishing him for mere non- fulfilment of projected targets without anything more does not warrant imposing of any punishment. It only warrants issuing note of advice and that if there is no sufficient material of existing and persisting criminality in the area or there are statistics suggesting that the breaches of the Excise Act and rules framed thereunder which have been detected are too scant to match the notoriety of the area for commission of such breaches of law or committing offences. In the absence of any relevant material the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority is otherwise not sustainable. "
(3.) THE impugned punishment orders which suffers from the vice of unreasonableness and arbitrariness are not sustainable. THE preliminary objections raised on behalf of the respondents are devoid of merit. For these reasons, I allow the writ petition and set aside the impugned orders dated March 2, 1998, April 3, 1998 and September 18, 2001. I direct the respondents to provide all consequential benefits to the petitioner as if the punishment was never imposed on the petitioner. No costs. .;