Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of punishment as contained in Memo No. 715 dated 03.06.2008 passed by the Respondent No. 3, the District Superintendent of Education-cum-Sub-Divisional Education Officer, Bokaro whereby the punishment of withholding two annual increment with cumulative effect has been awarded and also it has been held that petitioner is not entitled for salary for the suspension period.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was posted as In-charge Headmaster in Upgraded Middle School, Podudih, Chas at the relevant point of time and during the course of inspection, the school was found closed. Lapses were found on the part of the petitioner in making no efforts towards enrollment of students in school and thereby he was found to have committed dereliction in duty and disobedience to the orders of superior authorities in connection with scheme for “School Chale Abhiyan, 2006”. Accordingly, petitioner was put under suspension on 13.05.2006. He was served charge sheet under Form-Ka with the aforesaid allegation. The petitioner denied all such allegations made against him through reply which according to the petitioner is also annexed as Annexure-D to the supplementary counter affidavit. After elapse of more than ten month, the suspension of all 13 teachers including the petitioner was revoked(Annexure-4). However, it has been submitted on the part of the petitioner that the impugned order dated 03.06.2008 has been passed by the District Superintendent of Education-cum-Sub-Divisional Education Officer, Bokaro imposing the aforesaid punishment, on the basis of the enquiry report and upon review of the evidences by the department. The petitioner contends that no proper enquiry was held giving him reasonable opportunity to defend himself and no copy of the enquiry report or second show cause was served upon to enable him to file reply to the second show cause. It is submitted that by the impugned order a major punishment has been imposed in the nature of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect, which can be done only by a full dress enquiry proceeding as such punishment has everlasting effect not only till his retirement but even in consequential post retirement benefit. His scale of pay will be reduced by two increments for the rest of his service career. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that withholding of two increments with cumulative effect has been held to be a major penalty in a judgment delivered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in a case of Kulwant Singh Gill Vs. State of Punjab reported in 1991 supp (1) SCC 504.

4. The respondents have appeared and filed their counter and supplementary counter affidavit wherein it has been reiterated that during the course of inspection by the inspection team, the school was found close on 24.04.2006 and the concerned teachers including the petitioner were put under suspension by Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro vide letter dated 27.04.2006 and charges in Form-K were served upon the petitioner vide Memo No. 1054 dated 15.05.2006, which is as follows:-

(a) the school was found closed on 24.04.2006

(b) effective efforts were not done under the programme “School Chalen Hum”

(c) slackness towards his duties

(d) disobedience of order of higher authorities.

5. Subsequently, the suspension of the petitioner was revoked vide order dated 05.03.2007 and under Rule 8 sub rule 1(iii) of Disciplinary Action Rule,1994, the petitioner was awarded with punishment withholding two annual increments with cumulative effect as well as the payment of salary of suspension period will not be paid vide Memo No. 715 Bokaro dated 03.06.2008.

6. By way of supplementary counter affidavit, it has further been stated that punishment awarded to the petitioner is a minor punishment after observing all the rules of procedures and after considering the show cause reply of the petitioner dated 17.07.2006.

7. After hearing counsel