JUDGMENT

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to set aside the impugned punishment order dated 17.10.2008 and to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the rank of Commandant by affording service benefits from the date of his juniors who were promoted to the rank of Commandant.

2. Heard Mr. HS Paonam, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kh. Samarjit, the learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondents.

3. The case of the petitioners is that based on the complaint lodged by one Shahi against the petitioner, disciplinary proceedings was initiated against him. Being not satisfied with the reply of the petitioner, the disciplinary authority initiated regular disciplinary proceedings by appointing Enquiry Officer and the Enquiry Officer after completing the enquiry submitted his report by holding that the charge levelled against the petitioner has not been proved. However, the disciplinary authority held that the charge framed against the petitioner has been partially proved, thereby inflicted punishment of reduction of pay by two stages in time scale of pay for a period of three years with effect from 1.12.2001 to 1.12.2004 with cumulative effect with further direction that he will not earn increment of pay during the period of reduction after getting approval from the UPSC.

4. Further case of the petitioner is that the aforesaid punishment was challenged by the petitioner before the Gauhati High Court in W.P.(C) No.2773 2002 and during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner undergone the punishment including depriving the rights to be considered for promotion to the post of 2-I/C which the petitioner is eligible in the year 2003, whereas he was given promotion in the year 2005. By the order dated 1.2.2007, the Gauhati High Court decided the case in favour of the petitioner thereby quashing the punishment order and the authority also complied the order. Thereafter, the petitioner was due for regular promotion to the next higher post of Commandant in the year 2007, a fresh show cause notice was served on 1.8.2006 based on the same cause of action which was the subject matter of the earlier proceedings and inflicted the same punishment with the earlier one with effect from 1.11.2008 upto 1.11.2011 which the petitioner has already undergone.

5. According to the petitioner, the Ministry of Home Affairs gave a green signal to the proposal made by the CRPF authority for considering the promotion from the rank of 2-I/C including the petitioner to the rank of Commandant by relaxing the eligibility conditions prescribed in the recruitment rule. Thereafter, the CRPF authority has given promotion to other 2-I/C including the incumbents who were placing down the petitioner in serial number as well as upto 24th batch of direct appointee Commanding Officers by brushing aside the case of the petitioner on the purported issuance of second show cause notice. Hence, the writ petition.

6. Resisting the writ petition, the respondents filed affidavit-in-opposition stating that while the petitioner was functioning as Assistant Commandant in 96 Bn, CRPF, Dimapur during the period October, 1995 to July, 1997, he has committed a serious misconduct and he being a married man developed illicit relations with a woman, an employee of Forest Department, Wild Life Division, Dimapur. Since the petitioner acted in a manner unbecoming of a Government servant and thereby violated the provisions contained in Rule 3(1)(ii) and (iii) of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964, departmental proceedings was initiated against him. On completion of the departmental proceedings, the disciplinary authority in disagreement with the findings of the Enquiry Officer, tentatively held that based on the evidence available on records, the charge levelled against the petitioner was partially proved and imposed penalty of reduction of pay by two stages in the time scale of pay for a period of three ye