GORELAL Vs. SOUTH EASTERN COAL FIELDS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order of termination Annexure P/4 dtd. 23/3/2004. Vide the impugned order the respondents after a detailed departmental enquiry conducted against the petitioner have inflicted him with an order of dismissal from service vide Annexure P/4, which is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) The contention of the petitioner is that the impugned order is bad for the reason that there is no substantial cogent and strong material produced by the Management before the Inquiry officer to substantive the allegations leveled against the petitioner and in the absence of cogent/strong material, the findings of the Inquiry Officer could not have been accepted and hence the action on the part of the Disciplinary Authority terminating the services of the petitioner is bad in law.

(3.) According to the petitioner, he had brought on record before the Inquiry Officer the affidavit of his mother Anand Kunwar, wherein she has specifically stated to be the wife of Ramadheen and the petitioner being the son of from their relationship and that he in fact is Gorelal Gond and not Gorelal Chandra. This according to the petitioner has not been properly appreciated by the Disciplinary Authority, nor by the Inquiry officer before the impugned order was passed.