JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. By the medium of this writ petition, the writ petitioner has called in question the order of punishment and the departmental inquiry conducted by Shri Sanjeev Gandhi, Dy. S.P. (HQ), Bilaspur, whereby he has recommended for forfeiture of three years' increment, which was accepted by the competent authority - Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P., who issued order of forfeiture of three years' increment of the writ petitioner. 2. I have gone through the writ petition, the findings recorded by the inquiry officer and the show cause notice. 3. It appears that the punishment inflicted on the writ petitioner is harsh and has far reaching consequences. The punishment imposed is also not proportionate in view of the judgment made by the Apex Court in the case titled as S.R. Tewari versus Union of India & Anr., reported in 2013 AIR SCW 3338. 4. It also appears that the respondents have not followed the due procedure while conducting the inquiry and the disciplinary authority has not provided the opportunity of being heard to the writ petitioner in terms of the mandate of the H.P. Police Manual/Rules. 5. The question is - whether remand order is to be made in the given circumstances of the case? 6. The writ petitioner was facing inquiry right from the year 2008, has gone through pain, sufferings and agony. In the given circumstances, it would not be fit and proper to remand the case. 7. I deem it proper to quash the punishment awarded and is, accordingly, quashed. It is made clear that the writ petitioner is held not entitled to monetary benefits for the said period, but it shall qualify for other service benefits including the pensionary benefits. 8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of along-with all pending applications.