S.J.MUKHOPADHYAYA, J. - (1.) THE petitioner, a member of CISF is now posted at Gorakhpur. While functioning in 4th Res. Bn. Ranchi, was suspended on 5.7.1995. The proceeding was concluded and order of suspension was revoked while final order was passed on 22.3.1996. By the said order, he was inflicted with major punishment of withholding of increment with cumulative effect. The said order of major punishment was modified by subsequent amended Order No. 2152 dated 1.4,1996 and the major punishment of stoppage of increment with cumulative effect was changed to minor punishment as simplicitor stoppage of two increments for two years, with immediate effect.
(2.) SO , far as period of suspension is concerned, it was ordered to be treated as such for all purpose with stipulation that the petitioner will not earn anything more than what he has already been paid (subsistence allowance). The petitioner when preferred appeal, impugned Order No. 1527 dated 8/10.5.1999 was issued by DIG, CISF Unit, HEC, Ranchi. It was decided that since the case was dealt under Rule 34 of CISF Rules and charge was found to be proved and the penalty imposed upon petitioner will adversely affect the amount of pension, the order cannot be treated as minor punishment. In the background, he rejected the claim of petitioner for regularisation of period of suspension and payment of salary in the light of Government of India Office Memorandum dated 3.12.1985.
(3.) IN spite of time granted, no counter -affidavit has been filed by the respondents. The counsel for the Union of India submits that fax message has already been given to the authority concerned but has not received any instruction as it was to be received from Gorakhpur.;