JUDGMENT : N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J. 1. Heard Mr. H K Das, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner. Also heard Mr. D Bora, Learned Government Advocate, appearing for respondents. 2. The Petitioner, in the present Writ Petition, has presented a challenge, to an order dated 17.01.2024, issued by the Director General of Police, Assam, as the Disciplinary Authority, imposing a penalty of dismissal from service upon the petitioner, on conclusion of a departmental proceeding, instituted against him. 3. The petitioner, herein, while working as an Inspector (Armed Battalion), attached to the Karimganj Police Reserve, was deployed as the Overall In-Charge of the venue, wherein, the Physical Efficiency Test (PET), in connection with a recruitment exercise, underway, in pursuance to an advertisement dated 25.04.2018, issued for recruitment of 5494 (Five Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Four) Constables (Unarmed Branch/ Armed Branch) in Assam Police, for the year 2018, was being so conducted. The son of the petitioner Sri. Shibam Sinha, was one of the candidates in the said recruitment process. The application, submitted by the son of the petitioner, in pursuance to the said advertisement, being found to be in order, he was issued with an Admit Card, requiring him to appear at the Venue for participating in the Physical Efficiency Test (PET) segment of the said recruitment process. The Physical Efficiency Test (PET) segment of the selection process included a race and long jump. The male candidates in the race, were subjected to a 3.2 km race, which was mandated to be completed within 14 (fourteen) minutes and the same was to carry 20 marks. The said Physical Efficiency Test (PET) was conducted under CCTV surveillance and by using RFID Chip and each candidate was required to affix a RFID Chip in their body, which would count their accurate timing, as well the laps as completed by them, which was further monitored by CCTV surveillance. The son of the petitioner, on 10.09.2021, along with other candidates, which also included wards of other police personnel deployed in the district of Karimganj, participated in the said recruitment exercise. The petitioner, at the relevant point of time, as noticed hereinabove, was deployed as an Observer. The son of the petitioner, on 10.09.2021, along with other candidates, which also included wards of other police personnel deployed in the district of Karimganj, participated in the said recruitment exercise. The petitioner, at the relevant point of time, as noticed hereinabove, was deployed as an Observer. The petitioner, being anxious to learn about the performance of his son, had monitored his performance during the early stages of the race, however, finding that the son of the petitioner was performing well in the race, he had left the place. It is also projected that the petitioner had once gone to the temporary shed, erected for InfoClab Solutions Pvt. Ltd., which Company was involved in the selection process, for taking rest as it was a hot and sunny day, and there was no other place, wherein, some shade was available. 4. After the said race was over, one candidate Sri. Bharat Dusad, lodged a complaint with the authorities leveling allegations of anomalies in the final results of the Physical Efficiency Test (PET) segment of the Recruitment process. The complaint was to the effect that candidates who did not complete the race within 14 (Fourteen) minutes and had also not completed 10 (ten) laps, were shown to be selected. The said complaint was examined by the District Level Selection Committee. The Committee, on checking the CCTV footage of the race, had confirmed the anomalies pertaining to timing, in respect of the 3 (three) candidates, including the son of the petitioner, herein. It is projected that all the 3 (Three) candidates, against whom anomalies were found, were wards of employees of the Assam Police. On the said anomaly coming to the notice, a meeting of the District Level Selection Committee was convened on 27.09.2021 and the said Committee, after examining the CCTV footage, drew conclusions that the son of the petitioner had only completed 9 (nine) laps, however, the actual result had shown 10 (ten) laps. The personnel of InfoClab Solutions Pvt. Ltd., were questioned by the said Committee and the Committee suspected the involvement of one Sri. Azam Khatib, in the manipulation of results and accordingly, a conclusion was arrived at to institute criminal proceedings, in the matter. The personnel of InfoClab Solutions Pvt. Ltd., were questioned by the said Committee and the Committee suspected the involvement of one Sri. Azam Khatib, in the manipulation of results and accordingly, a conclusion was arrived at to institute criminal proceedings, in the matter. Accordingly, an FIR was lodged before the Officer In-Charge, Karimganj Police Station, against the persons involved, including 3 (Three) officials of InfoClab Solutions Pvt. Ltd. The said FIR was registered as Karimganj P.S Case No. 962/2021 under Section 120B/468/471 IPC. The petitioner, along with his son, was arrested on 28.09.2021. Thereafter, in view of the arrest of the petitioner, in connection with the said Police Case, vide an order dated 06.10.2021, the petitioner was placed under deemed suspension. The petitioner and his son were, subsequently, enlarged on bail, vide an order dated 21.10.2021, passed by the Court of Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Karimganj. The said misconduct, having come on record against the petitioner, the Director General of Police, Assam, vide an order dated 11.10.2021, directed for institution of a departmental proceeding against the petitioner, on the ground of commission by him, of serious misconduct, in respect of his involvement in falsification of result sheets in the ongoing Physical Efficiency Test (PET) segment of the Constable Recruitment Rally held in the month of September 2021 in Karimganj. Accordingly, a show-cause notice dated 13.12.2021, was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted his show-cause reply to the said show-cause, on 27.12.2021, and denied the allegations levelled against him. The reply of the petitioner, on being perused, not being found to be satisfactory, the disciplinary authority of the petitioner, vide order dated 17.02.2022, proceeded to direct for holding of an enquiry in the matter, against the petitioner and appointed an Enquiry Officer, as well as a Presenting Officer, for the purpose. At this stage, the Disciplinary Authority of the petitioner, vide an order dated 08.08.2022, proceeded to revoke the order of suspension of the petitioner and reinstated him in service. The Enquiry Officer, thereafter, proceeded with the enquiry and on conclusion of the same, submitted his enquiry report. The respondent authorities, thereafter, vide a communication dated 08.11.2023, forwarded the Enquiry Report to the petitioner, requiring him to submit a representation, thereon. The petitioner, accordingly, submitted his representation to the Enquiry Report on 19.12.2023. The Enquiry Officer, thereafter, proceeded with the enquiry and on conclusion of the same, submitted his enquiry report. The respondent authorities, thereafter, vide a communication dated 08.11.2023, forwarded the Enquiry Report to the petitioner, requiring him to submit a representation, thereon. The petitioner, accordingly, submitted his representation to the Enquiry Report on 19.12.2023. Pursuant to the submission of the representation by the petitioner to the Enquiry Report, as forwarded to him, the disciplinary authority of the petitioner i.e. Director General of Police, Assam, considered the Enquiry Report, in the light of the contentions, raised by the petitioner, in his said representation and thereafter, vide order dated 17.01.2024, proceeded to impose upon the petitioner, the penalty of dismissal from service. Further, the period of suspension of the petitioner w.e.f 06.10.2021 to 08.08.2022, was directed to be treated as dies non, by applying the principle of no work no pay. Although an appeal was preferred by the petitioner, against the said order dated 17.01.2024, the petitioner having instituted the present Writ Petition on 25.01.2024, it was submitted that he would not pursue his said appeal. Accordingly, being aggrieved by the imposition of the penalty of dismissal from service, the petitioner has instituted the present Writ Petition. 5. Mr. H K Das, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, by taking this Court through the materials brought on record, has submitted that the proceedings, both departmental as well as criminal, came to be instituted against the petitioner basing on a complaint filed by one of the candidates in the recruitment process i.e. Sri. Bharat Dusad. However, a copy of the said complaint was never furnished to the petitioner. Mr. H K Das has further submitted that the copies of the deposition of the witnesses in the enquiry, except the deposition made by PW-13, were never furnished to the petitioner. Accordingly, he submits that the petitioner was prejudiced in submitting an effective representation against the findings of the Enquiry officer in the enquiry report. Mr. H K Das, by referring to the show-cause notice issued in the matter, to the petitioner, has highlighted that the basic allegations levelled against the petitioner, therein, is that he had exerted undue influence on Sri. Mr. H K Das, by referring to the show-cause notice issued in the matter, to the petitioner, has highlighted that the basic allegations levelled against the petitioner, therein, is that he had exerted undue influence on Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, InfoClab Solutions Pvt. Ltd., for altering the result sheet in the running event of Physical Efficiency Test (PET), to enable his son to be shown as having passed in the said event. Mr. H K Das, submits that Sri. Azam Khatib had deposed in the regular enquiry held against the petitioner, as PW-13. He submits that a perusal of the deposition made by PW-13, in the enquiry, would reveal that he had deposed that he had no acquaintance with the petitioner and had categorically stated, during his deposition, that the error shown in the system could have occasioned on account of a technical snag in the RFID Chip. He submits that given the manner in which the PW-13 had deposed, the Presenting Officer had not examined the said PW-13 on any statement that was attributed to have been made by him during the preliminary enquiry. He submits that from the deposition of PW-13, it is clear that the petitioner had, in no manner, exerted any influence upon him for manipulating the result sheet, with regard to the Physical Efficiency Test (PET) segment of the selection process, in respect of the son of the petitioner. 6. Mr. H K Das, by referring to the Enquiry Report, has submitted that the Enquiry Officer, for the purpose of drawing his conclusions, with regard to the charges, levelled against the petitioner, had relied upon the deposition of PW-4 Sri. Gitartha Dev Sharma, who was the Investigating Officer in Karimganj P.S Case No. 962/2021. Mr. H K Das submits that the materials, collected by the Investigating Officer in the said Police Station Case, would be of no relevance, in so far as, the departmental proceeding is concerned, inasmuch as, the same was yet to be examined, by a competent Court of Law. It is submitted that the statement of PW-4 was based on the statement of PW-13, during the preliminary enquiry. It is submitted that the statement of PW-4 was based on the statement of PW-13, during the preliminary enquiry. He submits that PW-13, during the regular enquiry, having not implicated the petitioner, herein, the evidence adduced by PW-4 cannot be reckoned for the purpose of establishing the charge levelled against the petitioner to have been established, more so when the PW-13 was not conforted with such statements, attributed to have been made by him during the preliminary enquiry. Mr. H K Das, has further submitted that the conclusions of the Enquiry Officer in the enquiry report is primarily based on the fact that the other witnesses had deposed to the effect that the petitioner had exercised undue influence upon Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, InfoClab Solutions Pvt. Ltd., to alter the result sheet, in so far as the performance of the petitioner’s son, in the race, was so concerned. Mr. H K Das submits that it having come on record that it was permissible that an error could occasion in the system on account of malfunctioning of the RFID Chip and the same being beyond any human control and being automatic, the same being a machine error, it is submitted that the allegations, levelled against the petitioner, could not have been held to be established even by applying the principles of preponderance of probability. 7. Having made the said submissions, Mr. H K Das has submitted that the marks, secured by the son of the petitioner, in Physical Efficiency Test (PET), even after the purported manipulation, is reckoned, the marks scored by the petitioner’s son was only 21.75, however, the cut-off marks for the district of Karimganj for the post of Constable in Armed Branch was 22.61 while for the Unarmed Branch it was 25.29, in respect of OBC/MOBC category candidates. He submits that in the event the petitioner had any intention of altering the marks of his son, he would have altered the marks in such a manner, so as to ensure that his son achieved the cut-off marks. 8. Mr. He submits that in the event the petitioner had any intention of altering the marks of his son, he would have altered the marks in such a manner, so as to ensure that his son achieved the cut-off marks. 8. Mr. H K Das, Learned Counsel has further submitted that, along with the petitioner, two other officials of the Assam Police, whose wards had taken part in the said selection process and with regard to whom, similar anomalies were also detected, were also proceeded against, by institution of departmental proceedings, but were only imposed with a penalty of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect. However, parity was not maintained, in respect of the petitioner, herein, and he was imposed with a penalty of dismissal of service. Although the allegations levelled against the petitioner and the said two other officials of the Assam Police, involved in the matter, were similar in nature. 9. Mr. H K Das, Learned Counsel, in support of his submissions, has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Moni Shankar Vs. Union of India & Ors. (2008) 3 SCC 484 , Rajendra Yadav Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. (2013) 3 SCC 73 and Shobha Ram Raturi Vs. Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd. & Ors. (2016) 16 SCC 663 . 10. In the above premises, Mr. H K Das submits that the impugned order of penalty as imposed upon him would mandate an interference by this Court. 11. Per contra, Mr. D Bora, Learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents submits that the witnesses, deposing in the enquiry, had brought on record materials to establish the connivance between the petitioner and Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, InfoClab Solutions Pvt. Ltd. It is submitted that from the evidences coming on record in the enquiry, it was found that the petitioner had interacted with the Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, InfoClab Solutions Pvt. Ltd., during the time when the son of the petitioner, was taking part in the running race. He submits that the FSL report, also having brought on record the fact that it was permissible for the result of the said running race to be altered in the system by way of human interference and Sri. He submits that the FSL report, also having brought on record the fact that it was permissible for the result of the said running race to be altered in the system by way of human interference and Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, InfoClab Solutions Pvt. Ltd, being the person who was operating the system, at the relevant point of time, there being an anomaly, with regard to the laps completed by the son of the petitioner and the time he had taken for completion of the same, when viewed in the light of the CCTV footage, the same not being permissible to have so occasioned without the active involvement of Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, InfoClab Solutions Pvt. Ltd, a nexus between him and the petitioner, herein, was apparent. He submits that the deposition of Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, InfoClab Solutions Pvt. Ltd, in the regular enquiry, would be of no consequence, inasmuch as the other witnesses had categorically brought on record the statements made by Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, InfoClab Solutions Pvt. Ltd, during the preliminary investigation carried out in the matter, from which it was revealed that the petitioner had exercised undue influence upon said Sri. Azam Khatib, for altering the result sheet of his son in the Physical Efficiency Test (PET), segment of the selection process. Accordingly, it is submitted that from the materials coming on record, during the enquiry, the conclusions drawn by the Enquiry Officer that the charges levelled against the petitioner stood established cannot be held to be erroneous, inasmuch as the standard of proof required in the departmental proceeding is not proof beyond reasonable doubt but is one of preponderance of probabilities. 12. In the above premises, Mr. D Bora, Learned Government Advocate, appearing for respondents, submits that the penalty, as imposed upon the petitioner, a member of a Disciplined Force, would not mandate any interference from this Court. 13. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 14. The background leading to the institution of departmental proceeding against the petitioner has been noticed, hereinabove. 13. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 14. The background leading to the institution of departmental proceeding against the petitioner has been noticed, hereinabove. The disciplinary authority of the petitioner, vide show-cause notice dated 13.12.2021, had instituted a departmental proceeding against the petitioner and he was charged, therein, of having committed serious misconduct and serious dereliction of duty, on the basis of the following allegations, “That while you were posted attached herewith at Karimganj Police Reserve, you were detailed for duty at the Recruitment Rally for the posts of Constables (AB/UB) in Assam Police which was held at the District Sports Association Ground, Karimganj from 06.09.2021 to 26:09 2021 vide Memo No. KXJ/R/29/REC (AB/UB)/2021/4631-36 dated 05.09.2021. You exerted undue influence for altering the result sheet in the running events in PST/PET. On 23.09.2021 for enabling your son namely Shibam Sinha to pass in the events of PST/PET at the connivance of Mr Azam Khatib, Engineer Infoclab Solutions Pvt. Ltd. In this connection a case was registered vide Karimganj P.S. Case No. 962/2021 U/S 120(B)/468/471 IPC. During investigation of the case sufficient evidences were found against you regarding your exerting undue influence for altering the result sheets in the ranting events in PST PET on 23.09.2021 to get your son Shibam Sinha bearing Roll No. 3102390 qualities in the said examination.” 15. A perusal of the allegations levelled against the petitioner would reveal that it was alleged against him that he had exerted undue influence for altering the result sheet in the running events in PET/PST on 23.09.2021, for enabling his son Sri. Shibam Sinha, to pass in the said event, in connivance with Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, Infoclab Solutions Pvt. Ltd. The allegations levelled against the petitioner being one of having connived with Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, Infoclab Solutions Pvt. Ltd and also of exerting undue influence on him for altering the result of his son, in the recruitment process and his son, on account of the such steps taken by the petitioner, was shown to have cleared the running event in the said recruitment exercise. The reply submitted by the petitioner, not having been found to be satisfactory, an Enquiry was directed to be held in the matter. The reply submitted by the petitioner, not having been found to be satisfactory, an Enquiry was directed to be held in the matter. A perusal of the depositions made by the witnesses in the enquiry would reveal that basing on a complaint, in the matter, by one of the candidates Sri. Bharat Dusad, the District Level Selection Committee had examined the CCTV footage of the running events of the race, thoroughly, and on such examination, it was found that there were certain anomalies, regarding the actual running time, as shown in the CCTV footage and in the result sheet. It was further brought on record that the same coming to the notice, Sri. Azam Khatib of Infoclab Solutions Pvt. Ltd., was required to appear before the Officials and on a query made, he had admitted that he had manipulated the running time records of the candidate Sri. Shibam Sinha, on repeated requests of his father i.e. the petitioner, herein. It was further brought on record that it was stated by the said Sri. Azam Khatib that the records of the running event, could be manually entered into the system and the automated results, could be overridden. While the said statements, reportedly made by Sri. Azam Khatib, was brought on record by the witnesses, the said Sri. Azam Khatib, who had deposed in the enquiry as PW-13, had presented a contrary picture to what was projected to have been stated by him, during the preliminary enquiry. Sri. Azam Khatib, while deposing as PW-13, in the enquiry, had deposed that he had no idea as to how there was an anomaly in the results of the system and had deposed that he was a mere operator and had no control over the result sheet. He denied of having committed any manipulation in the matter. He also had deposed that the electronic devices can show errors. What is material is that said Sri. Azam Khatib, during his deposition, had denied to have any acquaintance with the petitioner, herein, till the incident had happened. He further deposed that during the recruitment process at the field, all the Police Personnel deployed used to take rest at the Server Room of Infoclab Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and the petitioner had also taken rest, therein. Azam Khatib, during his deposition, had denied to have any acquaintance with the petitioner, herein, till the incident had happened. He further deposed that during the recruitment process at the field, all the Police Personnel deployed used to take rest at the Server Room of Infoclab Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and the petitioner had also taken rest, therein. The said deposition of PW-13 is sought to be discarded by the respondents by projecting that such statement would be of no help to the petitioner, inasmuch as the same was of a co-accused. Admittedly, Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, Infoclab Solutions Pvt. Ltd., is a co-accused along with the petitioner in the Karimganj PS Case No. 962/2021. However, in the departmental enquiry, the other witnesses having deposed that Sri. Azam Khatib, during the preliminary enquiry, had deposed that he had manipulated the results of the son of the petitioner on being repeatedly approached by the petitioner, it is not found that PW-13, during his deposition in the enquiry, the Presenting Officer had conforted him with such statements, purportedly made by him, during the preliminary enquiry. The statements made by the PW-13 i.e. Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, Infoclab Solutions Pvt. Ltd, during the regular enquiry, having not being disputed, therein, by the Presenting Officer, by conforting him with the statement made by him, during the preliminary enquiry, as well as by questioning him, with regard to the report of the Forensic Expert, received in the matter, which was projected by PW- 4, the statement made by PW-13, cannot, in the considered view of this Court, be discarded. The evidence of PW-13, having brought on record, that the petitioner had in no manner exerted any influence on him to manipulate the results of his son in the Physical Efficiency Test (PET) of the Selection process, the allegations levelled against the petitioner, even, by way of application of the principle of preponderance of probability, cannot be held to have been established. The evidences adduced by the other witnesses have the status of only being hearsay evidences and the same cannot be said to be admissible evidence, for the purpose of drawing conclusions, with regard to the guilt of the petitioner, in the matter. 16. Having drawn the said conclusions, this Court would now examine the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer in the enquiry report. The said findings, being relevant, is extracted herein-below: 1. 16. Having drawn the said conclusions, this Court would now examine the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer in the enquiry report. The said findings, being relevant, is extracted herein-below: 1. The documents pertaining to the detailment order issued by the then SP Karimganj vide memo no. KX)/R/29/REC(AB/UB)/2021/4631-36, 05/09/2021 postulates that the Charged Officer the then ABI Tapash Sinha of Karimganj DEF was detalled for performing duties regarding PST/PET for AB/UB Constable recruitment process at DSA Ground, Karimganj from 06/09/2021. In that order, the Charged Officer and the then ABI-I Karimganj were detalled as Overall In-Charge of the venue. 2. It is evident from the statement of Prosecution Witness as well as documents (copy of Admit Card of Shibam Sinha), that Charged Officer's son namely Shibam Sinha participated in the running event on 23/09/2021 vide Roll No. 3102390 and Blb No-2295 at recruitment rally for the post constable (AB/UB) In Assam Police held at DSA Ground, Karimganj. 3. It is revealed from the documents available in the DP that the candidate Shibam Sinha son of Tapash Sinha (Charged Officer) appeared in the running event on 23/09/2021. The proceeding dated 27/09/2021 taken by the DLSC evinces that the committee examined CCTV Footage of 03 candidates Including Charged Officer's son and found anomalles. It was detected by the DLSC that Charged Officer's son in the running event took net time 14.49 as per footage whereas, time as per result sheet 13.56. Moreover, laps as per footage 09 but laps as per result sheet 10.It is clearly suggest that the Charged Officer's son actually completed 09 laps but in the result sheet It was shown that he completed 10 laps in the running event and in the 3200/1600 Meters PET Provisional Result Sheet of Candidates, the sald Shibam Sinha was shown PASS 4. The copy of FIR of Karimganj PS Case No. 962/21, U/S 120(B)/468/471 IPC reflects that the Instant case was registered against the Charged Officer ABI Tapash Sinha and others. Moreover, it has come to light from the statement of PW Shri Gitartha Dev Sharma, APS, DYSP (HQ) Karimganj, who was 1/0 of the case, that the Charged Officer was arrested and forwarded in connection with the case after getting prima facie evidence against him. 5. Moreover, it has come to light from the statement of PW Shri Gitartha Dev Sharma, APS, DYSP (HQ) Karimganj, who was 1/0 of the case, that the Charged Officer was arrested and forwarded in connection with the case after getting prima facie evidence against him. 5. The prima facle evidence elicited during enquiry clearly suggested that the Charged Officer the then ABI Tapash Sinha with his malafide Intention exerted undue influences for altering the result sheet in the running events in PST/PET for enabling his son namely Shibam Sinha to pass in the running events at the connivance of Mr. Azam Khatib, Engineer, Infoclab Solutions Pvt Ltd. 17. The findings recorded at Sl. No. 1 & 2 are of no relevance, inasmuch as, the same only reiterates the facts of holding of the said selection process and the engagement of the petitioner, therein, as the overall In-Charge of the venue. The said findings bring on record that the presence of the petitioner, at the venue of the recruitment exercise, was permissible. With regard to the findings at Sl. No. 3 above, it was projected that the District Level Committee on examination of the CCTV footage of three candidates, including the petitioner’s son, had found anomalies and it was found that the petitioner’s son, in the running event, had taken a net time of 14.49 as per CCTV footage, whereas, as per the result sheet, he was shown to have completed the race within net time of 13.56. Further as per the CCTV footage, the petitioner’s son was found to have completed only 9 (nine) laps while, as per the result sheet, he was shown to have completed 10 (ten) laps, it was concluded by the Enquiry Officer, that the petitioner’s son had actually completed 9 (nine) laps, but it was shown that he had completed 10 (ten) laps, and was shown to have passed the running race, of the Physical Efficiency Test (PET) segment of the Selection Process. While the said conclusion was reached by the Enquiry Officer, it is found that in the regular enquiry, the CCTV footage concerned, was not exhibited. A copy of such CCTV footage is also not found to have been furnished to the petitioner, in the matter. Accordingly, the conclusions drawn at Sl. While the said conclusion was reached by the Enquiry Officer, it is found that in the regular enquiry, the CCTV footage concerned, was not exhibited. A copy of such CCTV footage is also not found to have been furnished to the petitioner, in the matter. Accordingly, the conclusions drawn at Sl. No. 3, by the Enquiry Officer, is found to have been so drawn on materials not coming on record in the enquiry. Accordingly, the said conclusion, drawn by the Enquiry Officer, would not mandate an acceptance from this Court. 18. The Enquiry Officer, at Sl. No. 4 of his findings, has recorded that the petitioner was arrested, in connection with Karimganj PS Case No. 962/2021, and had, by relying upon the statement of PW-4, Sri. Gitartha Dev Sarma, Investigating Officer in the said criminal case, held that the petitioner was forwarded to the Court, only after getting prima facie evidence against him. The said conclusions can, in no manner, be said to be one which has the effect of establishing the charges, leveled against the petitioner, in the enquiry. The conclusions reached in the criminal investigation underway, against the petitioner, would be subject to the filing of a charge-sheet and examination of such evidence, in the trial, that may be held in the criminal proceedings before the Court of Competent Jurisdiction. The materials collected during the investigation of a criminal case cannot be held to be conclusive evidence, against a delinquent in a departmental proceeding, initiated against him. 19. Having drawn the said conclusions, the Enquiry Officer, at Sl. No. 5 of his findings, has proceeded to hold that the prima facie evidence elicited during an enquiry clearly suggested that the petitioner had, with malafide intention, exerted undue influence for altering the result sheet in the running event in Physical Efficiency Test (PET) segment of the Selection Process for enabling his son Sri. Shibam Sinha, to pass the running event upon Sri. Azam Khatib, Engineer, Infoclab Solutions Pvt. Ltd. The said findings as already held, hereinabove, is without any basis and is not based on any material coming on record. Such conclusions, is contrary to the evidence adduced by PW-13, Sri. Azam Khatib, in the enquiry. This Court has already held that the evidences adduced by other witnesses, are all hearsay, in nature and/or evidences, which have not been established in the enquiry, in a manner known to law. Such conclusions, is contrary to the evidence adduced by PW-13, Sri. Azam Khatib, in the enquiry. This Court has already held that the evidences adduced by other witnesses, are all hearsay, in nature and/or evidences, which have not been established in the enquiry, in a manner known to law. Accordingly, the said conclusion cannot be also held to have the effect of holding the petitioner to be guilty of the allegations levelled against him, in the departmental proceedings, so instituted. 20. In view of the above conclusions reached by this Court, this Court is of the considered view that none of the findings, recorded by the Enquiry Officer in the enquiry report, would mandate acceptance and it is held that all such conclusions have not been so recorded, basing on the admissible evidence coming on record in the enquiry. Basing on the said findings, the charges, levelled against the petitioner, cannot be held to have been established in the enquiry. 21. The disciplinary authority, vide the order dated 17.01.2024, having proceeded to impose the penalty of dismissal from service, upon the petitioner only by concurring with the findings, recorded by the Enquiry Officer in the enquiry report, this Court having already concluded that the said findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer, would not mandate an acceptance, the penalty of dismissal from service, as imposed upon the petitioner by the disciplinary authority, would not mandate an acceptance. 22. Accordingly, for the reasons assigned hereinabove, the impugned order dated 17.01.2024, stands set-aside. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner in his services, forthwith. 23. This Court, having interfered with the order of penalty as imposed upon the petitioner vide order dated 17.01.2024, and directed for reinstatement of the petitioner in his services, this Court further directs, that the petitioner, not being found blame- worthy by this Court, with regard to the charges framed against him, vide the show- cause notice dated 13.12.2021, that the petitioner shall be entitled to full back-wages, for the period he had remained out of service, upon issuance of the order dated 17.01.2024, by the respondent authorities. Accordingly, the respondent authorities are directed to compute the arrears of salaries, now receivable by the petitioner, in terms of directions passed, hereinabove, by this Court, w.e.f. 17.01.2024, till the date of reinstatement of the petitioner in his services, in terms of this order and to release the same to the petitioner, within a period of 3 (Three) months, from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 24. With the above observations and directions, the present Writ Petition stands disposed of.