7.Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as a Helper on 20.03.1998 and subsequently, he was served with a charge memo on 30.12.2006 and on receipt of the said charge memo, Enquiry Officer was appointed. After completion of enquiry, the enquiry officer found that the charges levelled against the appellant were proved and the enquiry report was placed before the disciplinary authority/second respondent. The second respondent furnishing the copies of the enquiry report to the appellant and he was issued second show cause notice. After receiving further explanation, considering the enquiry report and further explanation given by the appellant, the disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of stoppage of increment for a period of one year, with cumulative effect. Challenging the same, the appellant filed an appeal before the appellate authority/first respondent. The first respondent, after hearing the parties and also considering the materials, though found that the appeal deserves to be dismissed, considering the length of service he enhanced the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority into demotion to the initial post of Field Officer for three years in the lowest scale of pay, with cumulative effect from 15.05.2008. Challenging the same, the appellant has filed the writ petition. Before the Writ Court, the appellant raised two points that he has not committed any offence and he has not concealed any material facts and the selection committee and the Second Respondent themselves have accepted the dual name certificate issued by the Tahsildar and the disciplinary authority and the appellate authority had failed to note that the appellant cannot be imposed with such a larger punishment. Another point is that the appellate authority has no power to enhance the punishment. The Writ Court, considering the enquiry report and also the award of the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority, considering the grave nature of the misconduct, dismissed the writ petition.
