CWP(T) No. 7781 of 2008 01.09.2010 Present: Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, Deputy Advocate General for the respondents/State. Petitioner was found to have misconducted himself while serving as Excise and Taxation Inspector. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him and memorandum dated 9.1.2001 was served upon him. An F.I.R. in relation to the very same misconduct was also registered and criminal prosecution initiated for which prosecution sanction was accorded in terms of letter dated 9.5.2001 (Annexure R-II). 2. There is no dispute that petitioner was promoted as Excise and Taxation Officer in terms of order dated 8.9.2000. This was purely on ad-hoc basis. The respondents after taking holistic view of the matter revised this order and reverted the petitioner back to his original post of Excise and Taxation Inspector in terms of order dated 23.5.2001. 3. His promotion was on ad-hoc basis. The respondents were well within their right to take action including reversion by taking into account the totality of the circumstances. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the decision rendered by the Apex Court in State of Uttar Pradesh and others versus Sughar Singh, AIR 1974 Supreme Court 423 to contend that reversion is by way of punishment. 5. The facts of the instant case are entirely different and hence the ratio of law does not apply. The impugned order dated 23.5.2001 does not reflect in any manner that the reversion is by way of -2- punishment. The action was taken in public interest by considering the entire circumstances including the suitability and desirability of allowing the petitioner to continue to be posted on the higher post. 6. Hence it cannot be said that any legally enforceable right of the petitioner stands violated. For the aforesaid reasons the present petition is dismissed. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. September 1, 2010 (PK)