Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - (1.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition making following prayers:- (I) issue appropriate order or direction quash the impugned orders dated 17.6.1997 (Annexure-10 &11) passed by the respondents. (ii) issue appropriate order or direction directing the respondents to pay full pension and other retiremental benefits to the petitioner as if the impugned orders No. 2305 dated 17.6.1997 (Annexure-10) and No. D.2307 dated 17.6.1997 (Annexure-11) has not been passed by the respondent Board. (iii) issue appropriate order or direction directing the respondents to pay the balance amount of salary for the period of suspension as well as the Annual Grade Increments for the period of suspension to the petitioner alongwith all consequential benefits including fixation of pay at higher stage on account of the grant or the AGIs alongwith interest @21% p.a. from the date it became due till the date of actual payment. (iv) any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble may deem just and proper under the facts and circumstances be issued. (v) cost of the petitioner be awarded in favour of the petitioner."
(2.) Brief facts as noticed by this Court in the petition are that while the petitioner was working as an Executive Engineer with the respondent-Board at Falna between April, 1988 to 16/09/1988 and thereafter at Sirohi from 17/09/1988 to March, 1990, certain material was purchased for the respondents. Pertaining to the said purchase, a memorandum dt.20/03/1991 alongwith statement of allegations was served upon the petitioner. The charge was enquired into by the enquiry authority and a detailed enquiry report was submitted. The charge was that the petitioner, while discharging his duties in 1988-89 and 1989-90, did not maintain devotion to duty and committed illegalities/irregularities, referred from Serial No.1 to Serial No.22 regarding such purchases. The enquiry authority dealt with all 22 allegations in Para 90 of the enquiry report and found that the allegations no.1, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 15, 17, 20 and 22 were not established whereas allegations no.7, 8, 11 and 18 were partly established and rest of the allegations were established. Thus, a large number of allegations stood not established or partly established. Para 91 of the enquiry report is reproduced as follows:- "91. The charge refers to Regulation No. 3 (1), 3(2), 28 (c),(f) & (w) of the RSEB Employees Conduct Regulations 1976. Regulation 3 (1) enjoins every employee at all times to maintain (i) absolute integrity and (ii) devotion to duty and dignity of office. Regulation 3 (2) is regarding supervisory responsibility. Regulation 28 (c) pertains to nonperformance of duties etc., Regulation 28 (f) to breach of any rule/instructions, and 28 (w) to repetition of misconduct. The cumulative effect of the 11 allegations established and partly established is that his acts of omission and commission fall within the ambit of all the above regulations excepting Regulations 3 (1) (i). Hence, the charge is partly established.
(3.) Thus, the charge against the petitioner regarding not maintaining of absolute integrity was not established and only the charge of not maintaining the devotion to duty and dignity of office as well as non-performance of duty was found established and disciplinary authority imposed a punishment of reduction of 25% of pension.;