Mohit Kumar Shah, J. – The present writ petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 22.09.2003, passed by the Group Commandant, C.I.S.F., Boring Road, Patna i.e. the respondent no. 4, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been inflicted with the punishment of lowering of pay scale for one year with cumulative effect as also it has been directed that the petitioner would not be paid anything except the subsistence allowance for the suspension period. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the order dated 02.08.2004, passed by the Deputy Inspector General, Eastern Zone Headquarters, C.I.S.F., Boring Road, Patna i.e. the respondent no. 3, whereby and whereunder the appeal filed by the petitioner has been rejected. Lastly, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 19.09.2007, passed by the Inspector General, C.I.S.F. Eastern Sector Headquarters, Patna, whereby and whereunder the revision petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.

2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner, are that he was initially recruited as a Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force (hereinafter referred to as “the C.I.S.F.”) and was subsequently posted at Gaya, however, by an order dated 16.01.2003, passed by the Group Commandant, C.I.S.F., Patna, the petitioner was placed under suspension and then a show cause notice along with memo of charges contained in Memorandum dated 27.01.2003 was served upon the petitioner, asking the petitioner to submit his reply within 10 days, whereupon the petitioner had submitted his reply on 24.02.2003. Thereafter, the Enquiry Officer was appointed vide order dated 07.03.2003, who had conducted the enquiry and submitted his enquiry report to the disciplinary authority on 28.07.2003, finding the charges levelled against the petitioner to have been proved. The disciplinary authority had then, while enclosing a copy of the enquiry report, issued a second show cause notice dated 28.07.2003 to the petitioner, whereafter the petitioner had filed his reply to the same, however, without considering the issues and points raised by the petitioner, the order of punishment was passed vide Office Order dated 22.09.2003. The petitioner had then filed an appeal, however, the same has also been rejected by the impugned order dated 02.08.2004. Thereafter, the petitioner had challenged the order of punishment as well as the appellate order before this Court, by filing a writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. no. 2102 of 2006, which was disposed of by an order dated 21.02.2007, granting liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate revision petition, whereupon the petitioner had filed a revision petition, however, the same has also stood dismissed by the impugned order dated 19.09.2007.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner bears a good moral character and has an unblemished service career, as such the impugned order of punishment is not warranted, especially in a proceeding initiated against him, wherein he was neither directly nor indirectly involved. It is also submitted that the petitioner has neither been involved in any misconduct nor he has been given an opportunity of hearing on the quantum of punishment and the punishment imposed upon the petitioner is disproportionate to the gravity of the charges found to have been proved qua the petitioner herein, hence it is submitted that the impugned orders are fit to be set aside.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents has submitted by referring to the counter affidavit filed in the present case that C.I.S.F. is a Central Armed Police Force deployed at sensitive sectors such as Airports, Units of Department of Atomic Energy etc. It is also stated that the petitioner was appointed as Constable in C.I.S.F. on 28.07.1994 and after completion of his basic training, he had been posted at various C.I.S.F. Units, including the erstwhile C.I.S.F. Unit at F.C.I., Gaya, where he was pro