P N SHETTY Vs. INDIAN TELEPHONE INDUSTRIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in both these petitions is the same and so also are the respondents. I need to mention at the very outset that the petitioner who was a Senior Officer employed by the Indian Telephone Industries (hereinafter referred to as "the ITI") was aggrieved by certain developments culminating with a transfer order dated June 14, 1990 whereby he was sought to be transferred from Bangalore to Rai Bareli. The petitioner moved this Court through W.P. No. 6340 of 1991 and the effective relief as I can gather from the pleadings is that the transfer order in question ought to be quashed and the petitioner be awarded consequential benefits.

(2.) The petitioner had not complied with the transfer order in question as a result of which the ITI instituted certain disciplinary proceedings against him. I shall have occasion to mention those proceedings, but suffice it to say at this stage that the enquiry that was instituted ended with a report that was adverse to the petitioner. Thereafter, the Disciplinary Authority passed an order terminating the services of the petitioner and this was followed by an appeal filed by the petitioner which came to be rejected.

(3.) The second writ petition, viz., W.P. No. 26208 of 1993, basically challenges the order of termination from service and the rejection of the petitioners appeal. The cause of action as I see it, is a continuous one, even though the two writ petitions were filed at two different points of time. The first of these petitions has been pending since the year 1991 and the second one since the year 1993. The petitioner admittedly is not an employee and an application came to be made in August of this year requesting the Court to hear these matters. What was impressed upon me on that occasion was, that the petitioner was appearing in person and he stated that he has had very severe health problems. He had further stated that as a result of intensive treatment taken by him, particularly, for a serious ailment like high blood pressure, his condition has slightly improved and he made a strong plea to the Court to take up the petitions for hearing out of turn. This Court acceded to the request and made a special concession for the reasons indicated by me. The matter was accordingly set down for final hearing and as the order sheet will show, the arguments were continued over a reasonably long period of time. I have experienced considerable difficulty in dealing with this case because the petitioner has indiscriminately attached an abnormally large number of documents, numerous applications are made from time to time supplementing them and to further complicate the matters, the narrations in the pleadings are extremely long-winded and there are references to numerous facts, instances, grievances, etc., the majority of which are totally irrelevant to the subject-matter of this dispute.