AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner has challenged order dated 21.03.2002 by which he has been awarded punishment of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect.
The learned counsel for the petitioner referring to order dated 16.10.2001 submits that the petitioner was on election duty for correcting voter-list and on the date of the alleged absence, i.e., on 12.12.2001 he was, infact, present on duty. However, to a pointed query what is the evidence which would corroborate the defence of the petitioner that he was on duty on 12.12.2001, the learned counsel for the petitioner again refers to order dated 16.10.2001 and the undated show-cause reply.
Order dated 16.10.2001 is the order by which the petitioner was deputed for correction of voter-list and this order, thus, cannot confirm presence of the petitioner on duty on 12.12.2001. No material has been produced by the petitioner in the present proceeding which would indicate that he was infact, on duty during the inspection, when he was found absent.
Finding no merit in the writ petition, it is dismissed.