JUDGMENT :

Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J.

1. By way of instant writ petition, petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside order dated 14/05/2018 passed by the respondents whereby the representation submitted by the petitioner pursuant to directions of this Court in SB Civil Writ Petition No. 8190/2012 has been rejected.

2. Brief facts which need to be noticed are that this is a second round of litigation. Earlier, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing SB Civil Writ Petition No. 8190/2012 wherein he challenged the order whereby penalty of removal from service was imposed against him.

3. It is to be noticed that this Court, after examining the facts and circumstances of the case and after considering the reply filed by the respondents, observed that case of the petitioner was required to be considered in the context of the parameters laid down by the Apex Court in Avtar Singh vs. Union of India & Ors.: 2016 (8) SCC 471 and passed following order:-

"This petition deserves to be allowed in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court. The impugned orders are quashed and set aside. The petitioner is directed to file a detailed representation before the Appointing Authority for re-consideration of his case in the context of judgment of Apex Court in the case of Avtar Singh (supra) and of this Court in the case of Kamal Singh Meena (supra). The Appointing Authority is directed to decide the representation filed by the petitioner by reasoned and speaking order with reference to the judgments as indicate above, within a period of eight weeks from the receipt of the representation.

The writ petition stands allowed accordingly."

4. The petitioner thereafter submitted representation wherein he prayed as under:-

"(i) The above representation may kindly be considered and decided to restoration of his seniority w.e.f. of 3.11.2007 to 16.02.2018. The payment of all pay and allowance w.e.f. 9.03.2010 to the date of reinstatement in service of CISF as per allowed writ petition ordered dated 16.02.2018 may kindly be allowed in the interest of justice. Being the petitioner was awarded removal from service under rule 34(IV) of CISF Rules 2001. Which is also unfair, unjust and illegal and not visualized word removal under sub Rule 34(IV) of CISF Rules 2001. In this connection no any amendment has been made by any authority till this decided of writ petition by this Hon'ble Court. The period of dismissal w.e.f. 9.3.2010 to the date reinstatement may kindly be regularized as duty in the interest of justice.

(ii) The reinstatement order may kindly be released on priority basis with in prescribed period eight weeks as per direction of Hon'ble Court.

(iii) The period to the date of dismissal w.e.f. 9.3.2010 to date of reinstatement will be treated as duty. He is entitled to full pay and allowances for period of which he would have been entitled had he not been dismissal under the provision of FR-54-A. The above period may kindly be allowed as per law."

5. The representation dated 06/03/2018 was examined by the respondents and was rejected vide order dated 14/05/2018:-

"1. WHEREAS, CISF NO. 074501856 Ex- Constable Mukesh Kumar Raigar (petitioner) of CISF Unit ASG, Mumbai has filed WP No. 8190/2012 in the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur against the penalty of Removal From Service awarded by Sr. Commandant/ASG Mumbai vide Order No. V-15014/CSIA(M)/Disc-36/MKR/10-1303 dated 09.03.2010 of suppression of facts of criminal case No. 154/03 which was registered against him in Ajitgarh Police station U/s 341, 323, 324 IPC and that he was produced before the court through Challan CS no. 99/03. The above fact emerged from verification of C&A by DIG BCCL Dhanbad from the District Authority.

2. The WP was heard by the Hon'ble Court on 16.02.2018 and disposed of with the following direction:-

"..... This petition deserves to be allowed in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court. The impugned orders are quashed and set aside. The petitioner is directed to file a deta