Ashok Kumar Gaur, J.

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-

"It is, therefore, prayed that the Hon'ble Court may call for the entire record concerning the case and after taking the same by issuing writ, order or direction:

(i) quash the charge sheet dated 29.7.94, enquiry report forwarded vide letter dated 27.3.96, letter dated 25.1.1997 and the punishment order dated 14.3.97 with all consequential benefits and the petitioner be treated to be in continuous service;

(ii) if during the pendency of the writ petition the petitioner is superseded in RAS Senior Scale, the respondents be directed to further grant him promotion to RAS Senior Scale with all consequential benefits of pay and allowance;

(iii) any other order or direction as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case may also be passed in favour of the humble petitioner;

(iv) cost of this writ petition may also be awarded in favour of the humble petitioner. "

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had joined Rajasthan Tehsildar Services in the year 1978 and appointed as Naib Tehsildar on 11.01.1978 and thereafter he was posted on the post of Tehsildar. The petitioner was promoted to the Rajasthan Administrative Services cadre on the basis of seniority-cum-merit vide order dt. 31.10.1991.

3. The petitioner was working in the year 1985 as Assistant Settlement Officer, Rajgarh, District Alwar and was also having the power of Land Record Officer and as such the petitioner was holding judicial Officer's post, as per Section 5(35) of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955.

4. The petitioner was served with a memorandum of charges along with allegations under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 dt. 29.07.1994 wherein total seven charges were leveled against the petitioner. The charges Nos. 1 to 6 were in relation to opening of mutation proceedings in respect of different khasra numbers in village Chhilodii and the charge No. 7 was in respect of violating the provisions of Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, as the petitioner was alleged to have allowed entries to be made in excess to the land than measurement by accepting the fragmented portion of the land. The extract of chargesheet is reproduced hereunder:-

^^vkjksi i= fo:) Jh fNxu yky oekZ] Hkw-iw-,-,l-vks-gkWy vkj-,-,l

vkjksi la[;k & 1

;g gS fd mDr fNaxu yky oekZ us o"kZ 1985 esa Hkw&izcU/k vf/kdkjh] vyoj ds v/khuLFk ,-,l-vks- ds in ij dk;Zjr gksrs gq, mDr vof/k esa xzke fNykSMh rglhy jktx< ds ifj'kh/ku la[;k 6 dks jtkcUnh ds vk/kkj muds Lohd`r djus ,oa dUgS;k iq= ikapk dk fgLlk vfu;fer :i ls ,d rjQk esa 'kkfey djus o LFkkukUrj.k dj vius inh; gSfl;r dk nq:i;ksx o fu;eksa dh vosguk djus ds fy;s mRrjnk;h gS tSlk fd layXu vkjksi fooj.k i= esa of.kZr gSA

vkjksi la[;k & 2

;g fd mDr Jh oekZ] ,-,l-vks- us mDr in ij mDr vof/k esa dk;Zjr gksrs gq, xzke fNyksMh rglhy jktx< ds [kljk ifj'kks/ku i= la- 7 ij jktLFkku dk'rdkjh vf/kfu;e 1956 dh /kkjk 48 ds fo:) fofue; Lohdkj djus ds fy;s mRrjnk;h gS tSlk fd layXu vkjksi fooj.k i= esa of.kZr gSA

vkjksi la[;k & 3

;g gS fd mDr Jh oekZ] ,-,l-vks- us mDr in ij mDr vof/k esa dk;Zjr gksrs gq, xzke fNyksMh rg- jktx< ds [kljk ifj’kks/ku la- 8 dk'rdkjh dh jatkcanh o dCtk dk'r ds vk/kkj ij [kkrsnkjh ifjorZu ds vkns'k fu;e fo:) djus o viuh inh; gSfl;r dk nq:i;ksx djus ds fy;s mRrjnk;h gSA tSlk fd layXu vkjksi forj.k i= esa of.kZr gSA

vkjksi la[;k & 4

;g gS fd mDr Jh oekZ] ,-,l-vks- us mDr in ij mDr vof/k esa dk;Zjr gksrs gq;s mDr Jh oekZ ,-,l-vks- us mDr in ij mDr vof/k esa dk;Zjr gksrs gq, xzke fNyksMh rg- jktx< ds [kljk ifj'kks/ku i= la- 9 dCtk dk'r jtkcanh o HkkbZ cVokjk vuqlkj jsdkMZVsM [kkrsnkj ds Lkhu ij vU; d`"kdksZa ds uke ntZ djus ds vkns'k vfu;fer :i ls fcuk l{ke U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ;kuqlkj djus o viuh inh; gSfl;r dk nq:i;ksx djus ds fy;s mRrjnk;h gSA tSlk fd layXu vkjksi fooj.k i= la[;k 7 esa of.kZr gSA

vkjksi la[;k & 5

mDr Jh oekZ ,-,l-vks- us mDr