By Court.- In this appeal the appellant has challenged the order dated 23.6.04 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 2373/2002. 2. The appellant has been punished in the departmental proceeding by awarding punishment of removal from service. 3. The main charge which was found to be proved and on the basis of which the appellant was awarded the punishment is that he being a member of a disciplined armed force indulged in quarrelling and manhandling the wife of a constable and that he refused to obey the lawful order of the competent authority and did not vacate the quarter allotted to him. 4. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that while passing the said order of punishment, the concerned authority has only taken into consideration the appellant's antecedent and six punishments awarded to the appellant in the tenure of about nine years of his service. Earlier he was awarded punishment of censure on the same charge and he was directed to improve his conduct. He has been now awarded punishment of removal from the service. Learned Single Judge has not appreciated the points raised in the writ application and has erroneously dismissed the same. 5. Learned counsel for the Central Government, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that the petitioner being a member of the disciplined armed force has to maintain proper conduct and obey the order of his superiors. Within a short span of 9 years of service he has been punished six times for proved charges. He was given opportunity to mend himself by awarding punishment of censure, but he repeated his misconduct and adopted defiant attitude. The order of punishment is, thus, proper and there is no illegality in the order. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the materials on record. 7. On going through the order of the learned Single Judge, we find that the points taken by the appellant-petitioner in the writ petition for assailing the order of the revisional authority have been thoroughly considered and discussed by the learned Single Judge. He has not found any infirmity in the order of the departmental revisional authority and has rightly refused to interfere with the said order. He has not found any infirmity in the order of the departmental revisional authority and has rightly refused to interfere with the said order. The petitioner being a member of a disciplined armed force indulged himself in quarreling and manhandling the wife of a constable and he also refused to obey the lawful order of the competent authority by not vacating the quarter allotted to him. Earlier, he was awarded a lighter punishment of censure and was directed to improve his conduct, but he failed to correct himself. Learned Single Judge has rightly held that the punishment awarded by the disciplinary authority and confirmed by the appellate/revisional authority was fully justified. 8. We find no ground to take any different view we uphold the order of the learned Single Judge. This appeal is; accordingly, dismissed.