K. Chandru, J.

Heard the arguments of Mr. R.S. Ramanathan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. M.T. Arunan, learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel representing the respondents 2 to 4 and have perused the records.

2. The petitioner challenged the charge-memo dated 26. 2004 issued under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1965 [for short, CCS Rules) before the Tribunal. At the relevant time, the petitioner was working as an Income Tax Officer at Thirunelveli. During the year 2002-2003, he committed a gross misconduct and harassed one assessee and his wife. He illegally initiated wrongful income tax procedures against one assessee and addressed the Valuation Officer of the Income Tax [for short, IT] Department at Madurai for determination of cost of construction of a house belonging to the assessee. On this pretext, the IT officials demanded bribe from the assessee and they were caught red-handed by the CBI on 28. 2003 As soon as the arrest came to the light of the petitioner, he dropped the proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the IT Act against the said assessee and withdrew the reference.