JUDGMENT :

Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for quashing and setting aside the order issued under Memo No. 2620 dated 09.6.2008 whereby the petitioner has been inflicted with two punishments: (i) warning and withholding of two annual increments with non-cumulative effect and (ii) period spent in custody has been decided to keep pending till the decision of the court.

3. The facts of the case as disclosed in the instant writ application are that while the petitioner was in service; in the year 1999 he was served with a memo of charge (Annexure 1) to which the petitioner duly replied asking for supply of relevant documents. Thereafter, in the year 2001 another resolution dated 01.2.2001 was issued, whereby one Thakur Ravindra Kumar was appointed as the Inquiry Officer by changing the earlier Inquiry Officer. After appointment of the new Inquiry Officer, the petitioner filed an application before the respondents in which the petitioner requested to change the Inquiry Officer, as he apprehended that the Inquiry Officer might give report against him due to previous biasness, but his reque