Hon’ble Neeraj Tiwari, J.—We have heard Sri Satish Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri D.K. Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondent.

2. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 1.8.2013 passed by State Public Service Tribunal, U.P., Lucknow (hereafter referred to as “Tribunal”) in Claim Petition No. 1698 of 2009 and also quash the orders dated 2.3.2009, 22.4.2009 and 21.12.2009. vide order dated 2.3.2009, the disciplinary authority has imposed minor penalty withholding of one increment for the period of one year and also awarded censure entry. With the further direction that with respect to remaining salary for the suspension period and other allowances, decision will be taken after giving show-cause notice. vide order dated 22.4.2009, the disciplinary authority has held that the petitioner will not be entitled for any salary and allowances for the suspension period except which has already been paid to him whereas vide order dated 21.12.2009, the appeal filed by the petitioner against the orders dated 2.3.2009 and 22.4.2009 (supra) has been dismissed.

3. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner while posted as Entertainment Tax Inspector, Grade-I in District Auraiya was placed under suspension under contemplation of departmental proceeding. vide order dated 10.10.2008 passed by Entertainment Commissioner, U.P.. By the said order, Assistant Entertainment Tax Commissioner, Kanpur was appointed as enquiry officer for conducting enquiry. Thereafter, petitioner was also served with the charge-sheet dated 1.5.2008 levelling eleven charges with direction to submit his reply. Petitioner has submitted reply of each and every charges on 24.12.2008. Again respondent No. 2 i.e. Entertainment Tax Commissioner issued a supplementary charge-sheet dated 18.121.2008 levelling five charges and petitioner has also submitted reply of the same on 5.1.2009.

4. After submission of the reply, the petitioner was anticipating that a regular enquiry be conducted in the matter and he shall also be afforded an opportunity to cross-examine the witness of prosecution and test the credibility of evidence of prosecution and also be given an opporitunity to adduce evidence in his defence. But without conducting regular enquiry, petitioner was issued a show-cause notice dated 6.2.2009 alongwith two enquiry reports dated 30.1.2009 and 31.1.2009 submitted by respondent No. 2 and further he was instructed to submit his representation/explanation against both the ex parte enquiry reports. Petitioner has submitted representation/explanation against both the enquiry reports dated 30.1.2009 and 31.1.2009 on 14.2.2009. Thereafter, respondent No. 2 has passed the punishment order on 2.3.2009 withholding one annual increment and censure entry with the direction to give explanation as to why his salary and other allowances of suspension period may not be withheld. After receiving the same, petitioner has submitted his explanation on 13.3.2009 before respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 2 vide order dated 22.4.2009 directed to withhold entire salary and other allowances for suspension period by way of punishment. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed Claim Petition No. 1698 of 2009 before State Public Service Tribunal, U.P., Lucknow, which was also dismissed by Tribunal vide order dated 1.8.2013. Therefore, feeling aggrieved by the orders dated 2.3.2009, 22.4.2009 and 21.12.2009 passed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 as well as order dated 1.8.2013 passed by Tribunal, petitioner has filed present writ petition.

5. The main ground of challenge the aforesaid orders is that the petitioner was suspended by the disciplinary authority under contemplation of disciplinary proceeding while invoking provisions contained under Rule 7 of Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 for imposing major penalty but while proceeding was under progress, th