and basing on the report and recommendations of the Enquiry Committee, a punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect was imposed on the petitioner, vide order dated 23.06.2014. 4. Following the same, the 2"^ respondent directed the 3^ respondent to conduct an inquiry into the matter. The respondent vide letter 30.03.2015 submitted report to the 2"^ respondent, found that most of the teaching staff, including the present Principal, expressed satisfaction with the petitioner’s work. The report concluded that charges 2 to 7 and 9 to 11 were minor and with insufficient proof to deny the petitioner’s explanations. No evidence was found for charge 12, and charge Nos.1 and 13 were relating to leaving the residential quarter, and the said residential quarter in the college campus was occupied by the petitioner with prior permission of the correspondent. The gist of the report of the 3'" respondent established that the charges framed against the petitioner were not proved. Basing on the findings of the S'” respondent, a recommendation was made to modify the punishment from withholding of two increments with cumulative effect to withholding of two increments without cumulative effect. Consequently, the 2 nd respondent issued proceedings vide Rc.No.520/Admn.11/2014, dated 23.06.2015 directing the 4**^ respondent to modify the punishment in accordance with the respondent’s report.
