JUDGMENT 1. - The petitioner is at present working as Section Officer in the Rajasthan Government Secretariat. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that his promotion to the post of Asstt. Secretary has been withheld merely because an inquiry under Rule 17 of the CCA Rules is pending against him. Shri Purohit has submitted that even if a minor penalty is imposed under Rule 17 of the CCA Rules as and when the inquiry is completed and even if he is not exonerated such minor penalty cannot come in the way of his promotion in view of the Division Bench decision in Prem Chand Kasliwal's Case reported in 1990 (1) RLR 178 ) . In the reply it has not been argued that there is any other action pending against the petitioner and the only ground on which his promotion has been withheld is an action under Rule 17 of the CCA Rules. In this view of the matter it is ordered that while it is open to the respondents to proceed with the inquiry under rule 17 of the CCA Rules and to pass appropriate orders in the same in accordance with law the promotion of the petitioner on the post of Asstt. Secretary cannot be withheld merely because an inquiry is pending against the petitioner under Rule 17 of the CCA Rules. The writ petition is therefore allowed and it is directed that the pendency of the action under Rule 17 of the CCA Rules will not be any impediment against the petitioner's promotion on the post of Asstt. Secretary and the petitioner could not be denied the promotion on the post of Asstt. Secretary when order dated 10th September, 1990 (Annex. 5) was passed promoting his juniors on the post of Asstt. Secretary. The respondents would therefore consider the petitioner's candidature for promotion to the post of Asstt. Secretary in accordance with rules ignoring the factum of the pendency of the action under Rule 17 of the CCA Rules and in case the petitioner is found suitable for promotion on the said post the appropriate orders according promotion to the petitioner shall be passed with effect from 10th September, 1990 with all consequential benefits. The writ petition is allowed as indicated above. No order as to costs.Petition allowed. *******