ASHOK KUMAR GAUR,J. - (1.) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging order dt.20.07.2009 passed by the Reviewing Authority wherein it has set aside the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority dt.23.09.2005 imposing penalty of fixing the petitioner's pay on the minimum pay scale on the post of Constable and the order passed by the Appellate Authority dt.18.01.2006 substituting the penalty with stoppage of five grade annual increment without cumulative effect. The Reviewing Authority by the impugned order has remitted back the matter to the Disciplinary Authority for imposing any of the major penalty prescribed in sub-Rule (v to vii) of Rule 14 of CCA Rules, 1958. The petitioner has also challenged the show cause notice dt.04.02.2010 issued to him asking his explanation as why major penalty may not be imposed by the Disciplinary Authority.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner who was working as Constable in RAC 8th Battalion, was served with charge sheet dt.07.05.2005 relating to an incident dt.20.03.2005 wherein it was alleged that the petitioner was posted as a Guard and he consumed liquor, after Roll Call on 20.03.2005. It was alleged that the petitioner did not discharge his duty, left the camp area and reported back later after getting himself hurt. The Disciplinary Authority had served the charge sheet relating to same incident, bifurcating the change into three separate charges. The charge sheet was served under Rule 16 of CCA Rules, 1958. The Enquiry Officer was appointed to conduct regular departmental enquiry and enquiry report was prepared and submitted on 17.08.2005 and the Disciplinary Authority i.e. Commandant 8th Battalion RAC (IR) passed penalty order dt.23.09.2005 wherein the petitioner was visited with a penalty of fixing the petitioners' pay on the minimum pay scale on the post of Constable and further directed the petitioner to remain more careful in future and to improve his conduct.
(3.) The petitioner feeling aggrieved against the penalty order dt.23.09.2005, preferred appeal before the Inspector General of Police, RAC-I and submitted that the penalty order was proper. The Appellate Authority after considering the entire record came to the conclusion that the punishment was excessive and the allegation against the petitioner was found to be proved. The Appellate Authority set aside the penalty of fixing the petitioner on minimum pay scale and substituted the penalty with stoppage of five annual grade increments without cumulative effect. The Appellate Authority accepted the appeal in part.;