S SASI Vs. RUBBER BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the manner in which I propose to dispose of the Writ Petition, I do not think it is necessary to issue notice to respondents 3 to 6. Standing counsel takes notice for respondents 1 and 2.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is the following : The petitioner was appointed as driver under the second respondent on 15.1.1986 on the basis of a selection. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner for misconduct and he was suspended from service as per the order dated 13.12.1995. Enquiry was conducted. The enquiry officer found that the charges were not established. However, the disciplinary authority did not agree with the enquiry officer. A penalty of withholding of two increments for a period of two years without cumulative effect was imposed on the petitioner.

(3.) It is stated that the second respondent took a lenient view in the matter and ordered to treat the period of suspension of the petitioner from 18.12.1995 to 17.7.1996 as period spent on duty for all purposes including pension. The grievance of the petitioner is that thereafter, he was denied grade promotion even after the expiry of the period of punishment. It is submitted that there is nothing on record in the confidential reports so as to deny promotion to the petitioner. The petitioner relies on Ext.P3 sealed cover proceedings in support of this contention.