JUDGMENT - CHANDRASHEKHARA DAS T.K., J.:---The petitioner challenges in this petition the orders evidenced by Annexures 'P-6' and 'P-8'. By these orders, the petitioner was dismissed from the service. Short facts of the case are as follows: The petitioner was charge-sheeted for misconduct by the first respondent. The charge framed against him reads in Article I, as follows : “That the said Shri Maruti Laxman Sawant while functioning as Talathi of Anjuna Village in the years 1975-78 made wrong entries in the Form XIV in respect of paddy field surveyed under No. 251/7 of Village Anjuna by recording the name of Shri Jagannath P. Palyenkar. By the above act, he failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty and acted in a manner unbecoming of a Government Servant thereby violating Rules 3(1)(i), 3(1)(ii) and 3(1)(iii) of Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 and also violated Rule 17 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue (Record of Rights and Register of Cultivators) Rules, 1969.” Above charge discloses the facts as to what the petitioner had actually done. Memorandum attached to Article I further discloses that he has stated in his deposition dated 9-10-1984 that after giving notice to the Sarpanch, the Panchayat had notified the cultivators by 'beat of drum' and on the appointed day, he has proceeded to the paddy field to collect the details. That whenever, he came across the name of the cultivator, whose name is not recorded in Form I, the entries in Form XIV were made in pencil. Shri Sawant had admitted that the pencil entries in Form XIV have never been confirmed by the Mamlatdar although the entries were made by him for the year 1975 to 1978 in respect of Survey No. 251/7 of Anjuna. The said Shri Sawant has, therefore, failed to comply with the requirements of law and in the process made wrong entries in Form XIV in respect of the paddy field under survey No. 251/7 and thus committed a gross irregularity in recording the name of Shri Jagannath P. Palyenkar as cultivator. 2. On the basis of this charge and the allegations, an inquiry has been conducted. On conclusion of the inquiry, the first respondent imposed a penalty of dismissal against the petitioner by order dated 31-7-1987, evidenced as Annexure P-6. 2. On the basis of this charge and the allegations, an inquiry has been conducted. On conclusion of the inquiry, the first respondent imposed a penalty of dismissal against the petitioner by order dated 31-7-1987, evidenced as Annexure P-6. An appeal had been filed by the petitioner before the Chief Secretary to the Government and the appeal was also dismissed by order evidenced by Exhibit P-8 dated 19-8-1988. 3. We have heard the Counsel for the petitioner and the respondents. Mr. Kakodkar, the Learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the petitioner, raised two important points in this case. He submits that no offence as charged by the respondents, has been disclosed in the charge-sheet and, therefore, it has to be held that no offence has been established against the petitioner. He also argued that the punishment imposed is quite unwarranted and disproportionate to the charge proved against the petitioner. Though other contentions have been raised by the petitioner, we do not think that those contentions have to be addressed by us for the purpose of disposing of this writ petition. In his endeavour to establish that no offence has been disclosed in the charge and the petitioner had only acted as permitted by the rule, Mr. Kakodkar has drawn our attention to the relevant rules of the Land Revenue Code. Rule 3 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Land Revenue (Record of Rights and Register of Cultivators) Rules, 1969, reads as follows : “A record of rights to be maintained in every village under section 95 shall be in the form of a separate card in Form I for each survey number or, as the case may be, sub-division of a Survey Number or where the land is not surveyed, for each field.” This rule is relevant as the allegation against the petitioner is that he wrongly made an entry in Form XIV. But the Forms I and XIV are printed together. Therefore, the Rule 3 is very relevant, as far as this case is concerned. He further drew our attention to Rules 17, 18 and 22 of the aforesaid rules. Rules 17, 18 and 22 read as thus : “17. But the Forms I and XIV are printed together. Therefore, the Rule 3 is very relevant, as far as this case is concerned. He further drew our attention to Rules 17, 18 and 22 of the aforesaid rules. Rules 17, 18 and 22 read as thus : “17. Procedure of making entries in register of cultivators and crops.---(1) Every year at any time during the period when the crops grown in the village are standing in the fields, the Talathi shall visit the village for the purpose of inspection of the crops and making entries in the register of cultivators and crops. (2) The Talathi shall give intimation of the date of his visit to the village for the purpose of sub-rule (1) to the Sarpanch of the Village Panchayat at least seven days in advance and shall request him to arrange to inform the villagers by beat of drum or by any other suitable method about the date(s) of visit of the Talathi and its purpose and to call upon the villagers to be present in their fields and witness the entries being made in the register of cultivators and crops. He shall also request the Sarpanch to request the members of the village panchayat to accompany him during the crop inspection. (3) On the appointed date(s) the Talathi shall visit every field in the Village in the presence of the members of the village panchayat and the villagers who agreed to accompany him and make entries in the register of cultivators and crops in respect of each survey number or sub-division of a survey number. He shall allow the persons interested in land to see the entries made by him in respect of the land in which they are interested. (4) For ascertaining the person who has cultivated a survey number or sub-division of a survey number or where the land is uncultivated of the person in actual possession, the Talathi shall question the person who may be present in the land and also the villagers who accompany him. Where there is no dispute about such person, and where such person is also a person who according to the entries in the record of rights is entitled to cultivate the land or as the case may be to be in actual possession, the Talathi shall make entries in ink in the register in respect of that land. Where there is no dispute about such person, and where such person is also a person who according to the entries in the record of rights is entitled to cultivate the land or as the case may be to be in actual possession, the Talathi shall make entries in ink in the register in respect of that land. (5) Where there is a dispute or disagreement about such person or where such person is other than the person who according to the entries in the record of rights is entitled to cultivate the land or as the case may be, to be in actual possession and such person is able to produce before the Talathi documentary evidence in support of his possession of the land, the Talathi shall make an entry in ink in respect of such land and shall also keep in column (17) of the register a note about the document produced in support of his possession. If the person is unable to produce such documentary evidence, the Talathi shall make the entries in columns (2) and (3) of the register relating to such land in pencil and the remaining entries in ink. He shall also make a note in pencil in column (17) of the register about the dispute or discrepancy in possession.” 18. Finalising entries in register of cultivators and crops.---(1) As soon as may be after the talathi has made entries in the register of cultivators and crops, the Revenue Inspector or any Revenue Officer superior to him shall visit the village for the purpose of finalising the entries made in pencil under sub-rule (5) of Rule 17 and for hearing the objections, if any, to the entries relating to crops made in the register by the Talathi. He shall give intimation of the date of his visit to the Talathi and the Sarpanch of the Village at least seven days in advance. The Talathi shall arrange to inform all persons interested in the pencil entries of the officer's visit and shall call upon them to remain present at the appointed place and at the appointed time if they have any objection to the pencil entry. The Talathi shall arrange to inform all persons interested in the pencil entries of the officer's visit and shall call upon them to remain present at the appointed place and at the appointed time if they have any objection to the pencil entry. (2) On the appointed date, the officer referred to in sub-rule (1) shall after hearing the objections, if any, to the pencil entries and the entries relating to crops and after holding such further enquiry as he deems necessary for ascertaining the correct factual position, ink out the pencil entry if it represents the correct factual position or make a fresh entry in ink in accordance with the correct factual position after erasing the pencil entry. He shall similarly correct the incorrect entries relating to crops and shall put his initials at the end of such entries........................... .............. 22. Entries made in pencil not to be accepted as evidence.---An entry made in pencil either in the record of rights or the register of cultivators and crops shall not be accepted as evidence in any proceedings before any authority, Court or Tribunal.” Rule 17 deals with the procedure in respect of making the entries in the register of cultivators and crops and such an entry should be made in pursuance of the rule in Form prescribed as Form XIV. Sub-rule (5) of Rule 17 says that where there is dispute or disagreement about such persons or where such person is other than the person who according to the entries in record of rights is entitled to cultivate the land or as the case may be, to be in actual possession and such person is able to produce before the Talathi documentary evidence in support of his possession of the land, the Talathi shall make an entry in ink in respect of such land and shall also keep in Form 17 of the register, a note about the document produced in support of his possession. Sub-Rule (5) of Rule 17 also says that if the person is unable to produce such documentary evidence, the Talathi shall make the entries in Columns (2) and (3) of the register, relating to such land in pencil and the remaining entries in ink. He shall also make a note in pencil in column 17 of the register about the dispute or discrepancy in possession. He shall also make a note in pencil in column 17 of the register about the dispute or discrepancy in possession. Rule 18 says that as soon as the Talathi has made entries, the Revenue Inspector or any Revenue Officer superior to him shall visit the village, after giving due intimation to the respective parties and Sarpanch and also after giving notice to the interested parties, whose names are entered in pencil to remain present on a particular day and on that particular day, an inquiry has to be conducted and after holding such inquiry, strike out the pencil entry or make a fresh entry after erasing the pencil entry. A close reading of these rules would go to show that whatever entries made in pencil in pursuance of Rule 17 in Form XIV are only provisional and subject to change and modification made by the superior officer. As a legal consequence of those entries, Rule 22 clearly states that any entry made in pencil either in the record of rights or the register of cultivators and crops shall not be accepted as evidence in any proceedings. Therefore, whatever entry made by the Talathi in Form XIV in pencil is not a final entry and cannot be attached any evidentiary value. Consequently, by making any entry in Form XIV in pencil, is not taking any decision finally touching upon the rights of the parties. Therefore, by making an entry by pencil, at any stretch of imagination, cannot be said to be so done for wrongful gain or a wrongful loss to any person. Apart from that, the very object of those entries as discernible from the rules, is only to gather statistics about the nature of the crops, person who actually raised crops, crops so raised with irrigated water or rain water etc. 4. In this background of the case, if we examine the charge, it can be seen that no wrong entry has been made by the petitioner as alleged in the charge. Assuming for the sake of arguments that the entry is wrongly made, as we observed earlier, it is of no consequence, as it was made by pencil. However, grievous or serious is the wrong entry, as pointed out earlier flows from it no consequence. Assuming for the sake of arguments that the entry is wrongly made, as we observed earlier, it is of no consequence, as it was made by pencil. However, grievous or serious is the wrong entry, as pointed out earlier flows from it no consequence. Therefore, as rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that no offence of misconduct has been disclosed in the charge. If the charge does not disclose any offence, it cannot be said that the charge has been established as against the delinquent officer. Therefore, it goes without saying that no offence has been established against the petitioner and, therefore, no punishment is warranted. 5. In the result, the petitioner is entitled to succeed. Writ petition allowed in terms of prayers (a) and (b). Rule made absolute in the above terms 6. There will be no order as to cost. Writ petition allowed. -----