Judgment :- 1. The petitioner sought for a prayer to set aside the order passed by the 2nd respondent in Pro.No.20169/A1/97-1, dated 29.09.1997, as confirmed by the 1st respondent in Lr.No.14957/H2/98-4, Commercial Taxes Dept., dated 03.09.1998, whereby the request of the petitioner to include his name in the panel for the year 199798, was rejected on the ground that the punishment imposed against the petitioner under 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, dated 08.05.1997, was subsisting. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record. 3. The petitioner, while serving as Sub Registrar in Kelamangalam, Krishnagiri District, alleged to have sold the property acquired by him, through gift settlement, without prior intimation to the Inspector General of Registration/2nd respondent herein. He registered sale deed in Sub-Registrars office, Vazahpadi in document No.138/95, violating Rule 7 (1)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1973. In view of the above, charges were framed against him in proceedings No.39354/B3/95, dated 29.02.96, under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955, by the Inspector General of Registration/2nd respondent herein. Subsequently, he was awarded with a punishment of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect by the Inspector General of Registration, in order No.39354/B3/95, dated 08.05.97/14.05.97. Therefore, his name was not included in the panel of Sub-Registrar Grade-I for the year 1997-98, as punishment of stoppage of increment was subsisting at the time of preparation of the promotional panel. Subsequently, the petitioner also preferred an appeal, but the same also came to be rejected by the Government, vide Government Letter No.14957/H2/98-4, Commercial Taxes Department, dated 03.09.98 on the ground that the punishment was subsisting at the time of preparation of the said panel. Therefore, the petitioner, aggrieved by his non-inclusion of his name in the panel of Sub-Registrar, Grade-I for the year 1997-98, has filed the present appeal. 4. The contention of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that his name should be included in the panel of Sub-Registrar, Grade-I for the year 1997-98, on the ground that some of his juniors were included, cannot be accepted, in view of the fact that the petitioner, admittedly, suffered a punishment of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect, imposed by the Inspector General of Registration, in his letter No.39354/B3/95, dated 08.05.97. Admittedly, the said order of punishment dated 08.05.97 was in force during the preparation of the said panel of Sub-Registrar, Grade-I for the year 1997-98. Subsequently, the petitioner also did not challenge the punishment of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect. When the petitioner has accepted the punishment dated 08.05.97 imposing stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect and when the punishment was in force during the year 1997-98, admittedly, the case of the petitioner for his inclusion in the panel of Sub-Registrar Grade-I for the year 1997-98, cannot be considered. Therefore, this Court finds no find infirmity in the impugned order passed by the respondents. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed. No Costs.