- (1.) This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 31.12.2008, whereby the respondent No. 4 has passed the final order in the departmental proceeding and imposed punishment of withholding of increment for six months with cumulative effect. The petitioner further prays for quashing the order dated 26.02.2014 passed by appellate authority.
(2.) It is submitted by Sri Onkar Nath Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioner that from perusal of impugned order, it is clear that none of the witnesses stated anything against the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner took the defence that from 18.03.2008 to 23.03.2008, he was on leave, therefore, the question of sending information, regarding the absence of Constable No. 336 Ashok Kumar to the Headquarter, by him does not arise. He submits that the respondent No. 4 has not considered the aforesaid aspects and in a most arbitrary and mechanical manner passed the impugned order. It is submitted that even the appellate authority has not considered the aforesaid submission of the petitioner.
(3.) Sri K.M. Verma, learned G.P.-I, after going through the impugned order, has submitted that in fact the respondent No. 4 had agreed with the inquiry and pass the final order, therefore, the respondent No. 4 is not required to give separate reason for passing the impugned order. Accordingly, he submits that there is no illegality in the impugned order.;