( 1 ) THIS is a classic case of the disciplinary proceedings groaning under unsurmountable intricate technicalities of service jurisprudence.

( 2 ) THE petitioner landed before this Court seeking number of reliefs. But, however, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the challenge is only to the order of removal passed by the 5th respondent dated 19-8-1996 and the modified order of the 4th respondent dated 12-11-1996 reverting the petitioner to the post of Traffic Inspector Grade-I for a period of 18 months.

( 3 ) THE relevant facts leading to the case are that the petitioner was working as Chief Inspector (Enquiries) at the Regional Office, at Tirupathi. According to the petitioner, he made a request to the 2nd respondent - Regional Manager to change the Steno-Typist working with the petitioner as he was not maintaining secrecy of information. When he made such a request, the 2nd respondent for the reasons best known to him lost his temper and insulted in his Chambers. Thereafter, the petitioner was placed under suspension on 9-11-1995 by the 1st respondent and the charge-sheet was also issued on the same date alleging the following charges:"charge N