VINEET KOTHARI, J. - (1.) THE petitioner was working as Lecturer in the Government Women Polytechnic College, Bikaner, and a disciplinary enquiry was held against him, however, In the said disciplinary enquiry, the Enquiry Officer did not find charges as proved. The charges levelled against the petitioner were that the computer equipment and other furniture was taken out of the premises of the Institution without permission of the competent authority between the period 09.01.1996 to 22.05.1998 and was purportedly used for having his own coaching classes. The enquiry authority after considering the relevant material placed before it did not find the charges as proved vide the Enquiry Report (Annex.P/4) dated 19.01.2001.
(2.) THE Disciplinary Authority, however, disagreeing with the said findings of the Enquiry Officer imposed the punishment of withholding of two annual increments with cumulative effect under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 vide the impugned order (Annex.P/8) dated 12th September, 2001 and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. Mr. Rajesh Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner urged that upon detailed enquiry and recording the statements of the persons concerned, the Enquiry authority had clearly found that the computer equipment and furniture were not taken out of the premises for personal purpose but the same were taken out for repairing work by the petitioner with another person, namely, Hemant Verma, and was brought back on the next day itself. During the inspection also, twice over, all the equipments and furniture of the institution were found in order and, therefore, there was no misuse of the equipments and furniture of the institute by the petitioner. Mr. Shah also submitted that without any other controverting material at least none of which was put to the petitioner by the Disciplinary Authority, the impugned order has been passed without assigning any cogent reasons for disagreement with the findings of the Enquiry Officer and merely on the basis of suspicion express by the watchman (Chowkidar) of the said Institution, the said major punishment has been illegally imposed upon the petitioner.
(3.) ON the other hand, Mr. Ajeet Singh Shekhawat, Additional Government Counsel, however, justified the impugned order on the basis of same premises that the watchman (Chowkidar) of the Institution did not make any entries in the concerned register for movement of the furniture and computer equipment outside the premises.;