JUDGMENT : PANKAJ PUROHIT, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Feeling aggrieved by dismissal vide impugned order 21.11.2023 and 26.10.2023 contained in Annexure Nos.1 & 2 to the writ petition, the petitioner is before this Court. The petitioner was appointed as a Tax Collector with respondent-Nagar Palika Parishad, Jaspur vide order dated 29.12.2020 passed by Executing Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Jaspur. Some complaints were made against the petitioner, which resulted into a disciplinary inquiry against the petitioner under the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999. The petitioner was placed under suspension by the Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad, Jaspur on 09.12.2022 and was attached with Accounts Department. The Inquiry Officer was appointed and finally after inquiry, the petitioner was dismissed from service vide impugned order mentioned above. The petitioner merely contended that Rules, under which the inquiry was conducted against the petitioner, were not the Rules applicable to the petitioner rather the inquiry against the petitioner should have been conducted under the provisions of Uttarakhand Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003 as amended in 2010. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is member of a non-centralised service of Palika and covered under The Uttarakhand Palika (Non-Centralized) Employees Services (Group ‘C’) Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred as Rules of 2017). Under Rule 29(1) of the Rules of 2017, it is mentioned that disciplinary proceedings, appeal and representation against punishment shall be made in accordance with the Uttarakhand Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003 as amended from time to time. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that there is a misconduct, which was allegedly imputed against the petitioner is of the year 2020 and, therefore, the disciplinary proceedings, which were conducted in accordance with the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1999 cannot sustain. The disciplinary proceedings should have been conducted under the provisions of Uttarakhand Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003 as amended up to date in view of the provisions of Rule 29(1) of Rules of 2017. For ready reference, Rule 29(1) of Rules of 2017 is quoted herein-below: “29. The disciplinary proceedings should have been conducted under the provisions of Uttarakhand Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003 as amended up to date in view of the provisions of Rule 29(1) of Rules of 2017. For ready reference, Rule 29(1) of Rules of 2017 is quoted herein-below: “29. (1) Subject to such modifications as Government may make from time to time, the disciplinary proceedings, appeal and represent against punishment shall be made in accordance with the Uttarakhand Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003 (as amended from time to time).” 4. There is no manner of doubt on seeing Rule 29(1) of Rules of 2017 that since the petitioner is member of non centralized service of Nagar Palika, the disciplinary proceedings against him shall be conducted under Rules of 2003 as amended up to date. 5. Mr. Harendra Belwal, learned counsel for Palika does not dispute this legal requirement, admitting the irregularity, which has been committed while proceeding against the petitioner departmentally and admitted that the proceedings should have been conducted under the Uttarakhand Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003 as amended up to date. 6. In this view, as stated above, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 21.11.2023 and 26.10.2023 Annexure Nos. 1 and Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition passed by respondent nos.3 and 4 are hereby quashed. The petitioner shall be reinstated in service on the post of Tax Collector and the writ of mandamus is issued to respondent-Nagar Palika Parishad to refund the amount of Rs.15,05,116/- to the petitioner, which he deposited under compulsion during the disciplinary proceedings. However, a liberty is given to the respondent/Nagar Palika Parishad to proceed de-novo against the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of Uttarakhand Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003 as amended up to date in view of the provisions of Rule 29(1) of the Rules of 2017. 7. No order as to costs. 8. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.