The disciplinary authority must prove a charge in a disciplinary proceeding in a manner known to law, and legal evidence is required to establish the charge.

1. The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition challenging the order dated 28.07.2003 passed by the third respondent, the order dated 09.09.2005 passed by the second respondent and the Government Letter dated 14.05.2007 issued by the first respondent with a prayer to quash the same and give consequential benefits.

2. The factual background of the case on hand is that the petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Assistant on 01.04.1983. The next avenue of promotion is Junior Assistant. The qualification required for such post is S.S.L.C. The petitioner has written S.S.L.C. Examination during 1976-1977. But he did not get through. Again, he wrote the examination in March 1995 in Jameendar Higher Secondary School, Kattuputhur. Except Tamil and English, he had passed all the subjects. In the month of October

1995, he appeared for supplementary examination from the same school. The mark sheet has been furnished to the petitioner for supplementary examination on 21.12.1996 and the petitioner passed the subjects. The petitioner was promoted as Junior Assistant on 27.04.1999.

3. Two years thereafter, the certificate of the petitioner was sent for verification and adverse report was received from the Director of Government Examination to the effect that the number of the mark statement differs. As a result, the disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules as per the proceeding dated 20.03.2002 on the allegation of producing false mark statement to get his promotion. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 27.03.2002. A criminal prosecution was also launched against the petitioner by registering a case in Crime No.96 of 2002 for the offence under Sections 468 and 471 IPC on the very same allegation of furnishing bogus and fabricated mark statement. Meanwhile in the disciplinary proceeding, an enquiry conducted and the petitioner sought for copies of the documents and list of witness on 27.03.2002, but the same were not furnished to the petitioner. Again enquiry was conducted on 17.02.2003. No witness was examined during such enquiry and no document was marked through its author enabling the petitioner to cross-examine the said witnesses. The entire enquiry was over in ten minutes. The Enquiry Officer found the petitioner guilty as per the report dated 17.03.2003.

4. On 01.04.2003, the Enquiry Report was communicated to the petitioner. He sought for personal hearing on 16.04.2003, but the same was not given. The District Collector, the third respondent herein, passed the order dated 28.07.2003 imposing a penalty of reversion of the petitioner from the post of Junior Assistant/a pensionable service to the Panchayat Assistant/a non-pensionable service. The posting order was given to the petitioner on 28.07.2003 and he joined duty on 01.08.2003. The petitioner held the said post for a period of two years. In the meantime, the petitioner as an abundant caution, wrote S.S.L.C. Examination for the second time during the month of September 2002 and passed the same.

5. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation for promotion again by enclosing new S.S.L.C. Certificate to the Director of Rural Development on 12.04.2005. Based on the said representation, the Director has obtained a report behind the back of the petitioner from the District Collector/the third respondent herein. But no opportunity was given to the petitioner on the adverse report of the District Collector. The Director of Rural Development/the second respondent, while passing the order on the representation, strangely construed the same as an appeal and exercised suomotu power to dismiss the petitioner from service.

6. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the said order on 29.09.2005. As the same was pending, the petitioner preferred a writ petition in W.P.No.48577 of 2006 and this Court directed the Government to pass orders within a period of twelve we