JUDGMENT :

Nelson Sailo, J.

1. Heard Mr. A.R. Malhotra, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Zairemsangpuii, learned CGC for all the respondents.

2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the Order dated 30.08.2016 (Annexure-5) and the Order dated 09.01.2018 (Annexure-8), whereby a penalty of withholding of one increment of pay for one year has been imposed upon the petitioner and the review petition preferred against the said orders was rejected respectively.

3. Brief facts of the case as projected by the petitioner may be narrated at the outset.

4. The petitioner on being selected by the UPSC for the post of Civilian Officer Class-I (Group A) under the Border Roads Organization (BRO), the Border Roads Development Board (BRDB) appointed him as such and he joined the post w.e.f. 16.07.2002 as AEE (Civil). Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) w.e.f. 18.08.2010.

5. For the period w.e.f. August, 2010 to September, 2013, the petitioner was posted as the Officer Commanding 112 RCC (GREF). The respondent No. 4 on assuming the charge and command of Project Setuk, as Chief Engineer, detailed an inspection team to find out the details of vehicles/equipments/plants in which many odometers/hour meters were not working or not available/fitted with equipments under the jurisdiction of the 755 Border Road Task Force (BRTF). After the inspection was completed, the respondent No. 4 ordered for a Court of Inquiry to be conducted vide HQ CE(P) Setuk Routine Order No. 03/2013 dated 04.01.2013. The terms of reference of the Court of Inquiry amongst others was to investigate the circumstances under which many odometers/hour meters of vehicles/equipments/plants of 755 BRTF Sector were found in a defective condition/not working condition.

6. The Court of Inquiry proceeding was directed to be completed in all respect by 11th February, 2013. However, another order was issued on 08.02.2013 changing the composition of the Presiding Officer and the two members of the Court of Inquiry and the completion time of the inquiry was modified to 20th March, 2013. Consequently, the Court of Inquiry submitted its findings which was to the effect that a large numbers of vehicles/ equipments/plants of 755 BRTF were detected with defective/non-functional milometers/ hour meter. Out of 313 vehicles, equipments and plants physically checked, 42 of them had defective meters, whereas 28 of them were without any meters i.e. they were either missing or there is no provision for fixing them. The exact cause of the defect could not be specified as no negligence or defect report had been raised by 1077 Field Workshop during its inspection or repair of such defective gauges. Work Orders for defective odometers were not attended timely and there was no proper mechanism to attend such defects. The report of the Court of the Inquiry was accepted by the respondent No. 4 and he, accordingly, recommended administrative/departmental action to be initiated against the Officer concerned, including the writ petitioner vide his letter of Recommendation dated 12.04.2013 (Annexure-1). The recommendation was forwarded to the Director General, Border Roads (respondent No. 3) who upon receiving the same directed disciplinary action under Rule 16 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 in respect of the GREF officials, including the petitioner and also directed administrative action against three Army Officers posted with the BRTF. The direction and recommendation was made vide Order under Memorandum No. 17003/STK/C of 1/128/E1E dated 25.12.2014 (Annexure-2).

7. Following the direction, a memorandum of charge was issued in the name of the President of India vide Memorandum dated 28.12.2015 (Annexure-3). The Memorandum was signed by the Under Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Defence. Alongwith the Memorandum, a statement of imputations of misconduct or misbehavior on which action was proposed to be taken against the petitioner was enclo