JUDGMENT : SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J. 1. Heard Mr. Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Ms. Kanchan Kumar, learned J.C. to A.A.G. for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for quashing the order dated 16.12.2006 passed by Superintendent of Police (Technical Services and Wireless), Ranchi in departmental proceeding No. 06/2005 and also the order dated 30.7.2008 passed by appellate authority whereby the punishment of forfeiting one year’s increment equivalent to two Black Marks with all consequential benefits have been inflicted upon the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the month of July, 2005 the petitioner was posted in wireless VH.F. Control Room and was entrusted with the work of distributing T.D.S. Form. It is alleged that on 25.07.2005 while the petitioner was in V.H.F. Control room of wireless Ranchi, where supervisor V.H.F. Control Brij Bihari Ram, Duty Operator A.S.I. / 2098 Rajendra Rajwar, Assistant Constable (Technical) Ram Briksh Yadav and A.S.I. Arjun Rao were present and they demanded T.D.S. Form from the petitioner. On this it is alleged that the petitioner became angry and abused the said Arjun Rao in filthy languages and on this allegation departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner. Inquiry officer submitted his report in which out of the two charges the petitioner was exonerated from one of the charge and in the another charge the report has been given that the petitioner was indulged in abusing his colleagues. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the inquiry report has not been supplied to the petitioner. He further submits that the finding of the conducting officer has also not been supplied to the petitioner which cause serious prejudice to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has been afforded by opportunity of hearing and on the basis of the inquiry report the disciplinary authority has passed the order. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondents, this Court finds that the inquiry report has not been supplied to the petitioner which cause serious prejudiced to the petitioner and it is against the principal of natural justice. In view of the matter, the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. 6. Accordingly, the order dated 16.12.2006 passed by the Sup’dt. In view of the matter, the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. 6. Accordingly, the order dated 16.12.2006 passed by the Sup’dt. of Police Technical Services and wireless, Ranchi in Departmental Proceeding No. 06/2005 and also the order dated 30.7.2008 passed by the appellate authority rejecting the appeal petition and confirming the punishment order passed by the S.P. Technical Services and Wireless, Ranchi are hereby set aside. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.