The main legal point established is that the denial of the enquiry report to the delinquent employee before the disciplinary authority records its findings constitutes a breach of the principles of natural justice, and the right to receive the report is a mandatory requirement under the relevant service rules.

Rajesh Balia, J.-Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record of disciplinary proceedings.

2. The petitioner was assigned duty to assist in conducting the examinations, which were being conducted at Government College, Nathdawara where he continued till the end of April, 1985. He was to discharge his duties at Nathdawara from 28th March onwards until the examinations were over. During that period, it was found that he was regularly going to his village Roop Ka Guda without seeking permission from the competent officer and has also remained absent from duty on 29.04.1985 about which report was made to the Dy. S.P. on 30.04.1985 by the Principal of College of Nathdawara. It also transpires that during this period when he was regularly going to his village and he was absent on 29.04.1985 an incident occurred at his village in which a person named Keshar Singh died due to stabbing by his son. The petitioners name was also included in the incident of beating said Keshar Singh. This led to holding of preliminary enquiry.

3. Finally by memorandum of charge dated 21.04.1987, the petitioner was subjected to a departmental enquiry. The memorandum consisted of three charges, firstly that while he was assigned duty at the examination center of Nathdawara from 28.03.1985, he has discharged his duties from time to time but after discharging duty at the examination, he used to go to his village Roop Ka Guda. Charge No. 2 related to the fact that petitioner has left on 28.04.1985 for his village without discharging his duties at Nathdawara and without seeking permission of any competent officer, on that date and incident occurred in which Keshar Singh died as a result of stabbing by Jai Singh and incident of giving beating to Keshar Singh, the Delinquent Officer was also participant alongwith other persons named in the FIR. Charge No. 3 related to his remaining absent from duty on 29.04.1989 about which the Principal of College at Nathdawara had informed on 30.04.1985.

4. After holding the enquiry, all the three charges relating to leaving his place of posting for going to his village without seeking permission of any competent officer were found to be proved against the Delinquent Officer. However, his involvement in the criminal case resulting in death of Keshar Singh was not found proved.

5. Consequently, as a result of the aforesaid findings submitted by the Enquiry Officer and which was accepted by the Disciplinary Authority vide order dated 30.06.1999, the petitioner was subjected to punishment of stoppage of two grade increments with cumulative effect.

6. The petitioner delinquent has remained under suspension since 09.05.1985 until 11.05.1990, during this period, he has remained absent from the place where he was required to remain present. Considering this fact, the period of absence was regularised by treating the same as leave without pay and emoluments of suspension period order were forfeited. The services during absence from duty was also forfeited in terms of Rule 86.

7. On appeal, by order dated 111.1991, the appellate authority viz. DIG Jodhpur Range, Udaipur affirmed the order of punishment imposed on 30.06.1990 by the Disciplinary Authority.

8. The principal contention raised by the petitioner against the impugned order is that before making the order dated 30.06.1990 accepting the finding of the Enquiry Officer and imposing the punishment, the copy of enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer who was not the disciplinary authority has not been furnished to the petitioner, therefore, the impugned orders suffer from breach of principle of natural justice, therefore, the same cannot be sustained.

9. The petitioner relies on Supreme Court decision in Union of India & Ors. vs. Mohd. Ramzan Khan, AIR 1991 SC 471. He also placed reliance on Judgment of this Court rendered by the learned Single Judge in

M.K. Soni vs. State of Raj. & Ors., 1990 (2) RLR 541 and Jagdish Prasad Meena vs. Divisional C