JUDGMENT 1. - In the Joint Departmental Enquiry held against the petitioner and Serve shri R. C. Joshi, Bishan Dayal and Hemraj Singhal, the Enquiry Officer, by his report Annexure - 5 held that the charges against the petitioner are not fully established. The Disciplinary Authority, namely, the Government of Rajasthan disagreed with the findings of the Enquiry Officer and by order dated Nov. 2, 1985 enclosure of Ann. 8) held the petitioner guilty of all the charges and imposed upon him the penalty of withholding three annual grade increments with cumulative effect. The penalty of withholding three annual grate increments with cumulative effect falls within clause (iv) of Rule 14 of the Rajasthan Civil Service (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 (for short, hereinafter, "the Rules") and this penalty can be imposed, on charges being proved, after following the procedure provided for in Rule 16 of the Rules. Rule 16 of the Rules applies inter-alia to the penalty specified in clause (iv) of Rule 14 of the Rules and it is a major penalty (See D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 38/74, decided on May 24, 1984 Krishan Dutta Sharma v. State of Rajasthan & Kulwant Singh Gill v. State of Punjab, 1991 Suppl. (1) SCC 504 ). 2. It is the requirement of Rule 16(10) of the Rules that "if the Disciplinary Authority, having regard to its findings on the charges is of the opinion that any of the penalties specified in daises (iv) to (vii) of rule 14 should be imposed, it shall : (a) furnish to the Government servant a copy of the report of the Inquiring Authority and where the Disciplinary Authority is not the Inquiring Authority a statement of its findings together with brief reasons for disagreement, if any, with the finding of the Inquiring Authority; and (b) give him a notice stating the penalty proposed to be imposed on him and calling upon him to submit within a specified time such representation as he may wish to make on the proposed penalty". Compliance of this rule, which was mandatory, was not made by the Disciplinary Authority. In this connection, it will be useful to refer to the decisions retorted in 1970 RLW 287, 1984 RLW 281, 1984 WLN (UC) 73 and AIR 1991 SC 471 . Compliance of this rule, which was mandatory, was not made by the Disciplinary Authority. In this connection, it will be useful to refer to the decisions retorted in 1970 RLW 287, 1984 RLW 281, 1984 WLN (UC) 73 and AIR 1991 SC 471 . Since compliance of Rule 16(10) of the Rules was not made by the Disciplinary Authority, the order imposing penalty on the petitioner by order dated Nov. 2. 1985 (enclosure of Ann. 8) of withholding three annual grade increments with cumulative effect cannot be sustained and deserves to be quashed. 3. I, therefore, allow this writ petition, and quash the order of the Govt. of Rajasthan in Department of Personnel (K-3) dated Nov. 2, 1985 (enclosure of Ann. 8) whereby penalty of withholding three annual grade increments with cumulative effect was imposed upon the petitioner. I shall leave the parties to bear their own costsWrit Petition Allowed. *******