HARI NARAIN RAIGER Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner by making the following prayers in the writ petition: - Prayer

(2.) The perusal of the prayer shows that petitioner has challenged the order dtd. 8/10/1997 (Annex. 20), whereby the Disciplinary Authority had imposed penalty of stoppage of two annual grade increment with cumulative effect upon the petitioner. The order dtd. 18/5/2000 (Annex. 24) is under challenge as the Appellate Authority had rejected the appeal of the petitioner and upheld the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has made his submissions in respect of penalty order and the order passed by the Appellate Authority and further made submissions that the memo dtd. 24/9/1996 (Annex. 26), communicating adverse remarks of APR 1995-96 is challenged by the petitioner in the instant petition and counsel further submitted that order dtd. 25/10/1997 (Annex. 27) has been further assailed communicating the adverse remarks in APR for the year 1996-97 i.e. 1/4/1996 to 26/8/1996.