ORDER : 1. The S.L.P. is dismissed. However the remarks made by the High Court against respondent No. 4 to the writ petition before it which read as follows: "Therefore, the allegation made by the petitioner that respondent No. 4 was interested in the release of the truck, seized by the petitioner with 160 bags of poppy-husk, has remained uncontroverted. These uncontroverted allegations are sufficient for holding that respondent No. 4 has made the adverse remarks in the confidential reports of the petitioner due to personal annoyance and the ill-will and are, therefore, malacious. Clearly the objectivity with which respondent No. 4 ought to have acted while recording his remarks as controlling officer was totally lost and he had acted with bias against the petitioner." are not justified and will stand deleted from the judgment. Orders accordingly.