JUDGMENT :

S.N. Pathak, J.

At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to make certain corrections in paras-1(a), 1(d), 16 and 19 as well as in synopsis of the main writ application, as due to typographical mistake some error has been crept-up and for the ends of justice, the same are required to be corrected.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State has no objection to the same.

3. Permission is accorded.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make suitable corrections in the aforesaid paragraphs of the main writ application by red ink, in course of the day.

5. Heard the parties.

6. In the instant writ application prayer has been made for quashing the order dated 29.11.2018, issued by respondent No. 3, whereby a punishment of withholding of three increments with non-cumulative effect has been inflicted against the petitioner and due to the said reason, matter of promotion of the petitioner has also been kept in abeyance.

7. Petitioner has further prayed that after quashing the said order, the respondents may be directed to consider the case of petitioner for grant of promotion from the Basic Grade to Junior Selection Grade with all consequential benefits from 06.07.2015 i.e. from the date when the Juniors to her have been promoted.

8. During the pendency of the instant writ application, vide order dated 26.06.2020, the respondent-Joint Secretary in exercise of power conferred under Rule-14(iv) of Jharkhand Government Servant (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2016 has reduced the punishment of withholding of three increments with non-cumulative effect to withholding of two increment with non-cumulative effect by partly allowing the appeal preferred by the petitioner. The petitioner has thrown challenge to the said order by filing I.A. No. 5162 of 2020 which was allowed vide order dated 27.01.2021 by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

9. The facts of the case in short is that initially the petitioner was appointed as Deputy Collector vide memo dated 20.06.2006 issued by Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Govt. of Jharkhand and since the date of her appointment, she has been discharging her duties with utmost sincerity and honesty and to the full satisfaction of her Seniors. It is the case of the petitioner that vide order dated 22.06.2010, the respondent No. 5 has relieved the petitioner from the charge of Circle Officer, Sadar, Hazaribagh to the Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, on the ground of illegal absence and thereafter, vide memo No. 637 dated 02.07.2010, respondent No. 5 has recommended for initiation of departmental proceeding against the petitioner. However, respondent No. 5 by his letter dated 16.07.2010, reverted the petitioner back to her original place of posting i.e. Circle Officer, Sadar, Hazaribagh. Thereafter, vide letter dated 29.09.2010, the respondent-authorities asked the petitioner to submit her show-cause and again after a gap of almost three years i.e. on 06.08.2013, the respondents have asked the petitioner to file her show-cause. Upon receipt of the said notice, the petitioner submitted her show-cause on 06.09.2013, denying the allegations levelled against her.

10. Thereafter, after a gap of more than 3 years, respondent No. 3 vide resolution dated 28.04.2017 has initiated a departmental proceeding against the petitioner. The petitioner appeared in the said departmental proceeding and submitted her reply before the Enquiry Officer on 15.05.2017. After conducting the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted his report holding therein that Charge No. 1 and 2 levelled against the petitioner are partly proved and Charge No. 3 is fully proved. Thereafter, second show-cause notice dated 02.01.2018 was issued to the petitioner and the petitioner submitted her reply to the second show-cause notice on 16.03.2018. However, without considering the reply of the petitioner, the res