JUDGMENT :

ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J.

1. Heard learned counsels for the parties.

2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

“For quashing of the memo no. 1388 dated 10.8.2006 (Annexure-7) passed by Respondent no. 2 who has no jurisdiction, whereby and whereunder after revoking his suspension order following punishment has been imposed:

(i) Pay of the petitioner was fixed on lowest scale of pay.

(ii) No monetary benefits will be given for the suspension period except subsistence allowance.

(iii) The petitioner will not be allowed to handle any independent charge.”

Arguments of the Petitioner

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out of three charges, the petitioner was found guilty of one charge i.e. Charge No. 2 and the concluding portion of the enquiry report held the petitioner guilty of charges which was subject matter of charge no. 1 wherein the petitioner was found not guilty. The learned counsel submits that even the disciplinary authority has mechanically passed the order of punishment by only quoting and referring to the concluding portion of the enquiry report.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the present case is a c