PRAMATH PATNAIK, J. - (1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing order dated 02.11.2013 passed by respondent no. 4 pertaining to forfeiture of increment of six months, which is equivalent to one black -mark and also for salary of the period from 09.12.2003 to 26.10.2013 i.e. 9 years and 10 months and 17 days on the ground of 'no work no pay'.
(2.) Sans details, the facts as disclosed in the writ application, is that on 16.08.2003 a complaint was filed against the petitioner by one Raj Kumar Verma levelling the charges for not paying Rs. 30,000/ - against the purchase of one second hand Ambassador Car. The matter was inquired into by the enquiry officer and the enquiry officer exonerated the petitioner from the charges and found him not guilty, as evident from Annexure 2 to the writ application, but the disciplinary authority differed with the finding of the enquiry officer and awarded the punishment of dismissal from services, against which, the petitioner preferred appeal, which was dismissed vide order dated 29.04.2012. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the appellate authority, the petitioner moved before the revisional authority, who affirmed the order passed by the disciplinary authority as well as by the appellate authority. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court in W.P. (S) No. 1073 of 2006 and this Court after hearing the parties disposed of the writ petition vide order dated 23.08.2013 quashed the impugned order and respondent no. 4 was directed to pass a fresh order within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of order. In deference to the order passed by this Court, impugned order dated 02.11.2013 has been passed modifying the earlier order dated 08.12.2003 with the punishment as mentioned therein.
(3.) Being aggrieved by the impugned order of punishment, the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances.;