(1.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:
(2.) The brief facts as noted from the petition are, three chargeheets have been issued to the petitioner, the same being dated November 29, 2008, November 11, 2009 and May 31, 2013.
(3.) The case of the petitioner and so contended by his Counsel Mr. G.S. Chaturvedi is that the first chargesheet had resulted in an order of dismissal from service vide order dated December 3, 2009 served on the petitioner on December 11, 2009, which is 20 days before his actual superannuation on December 31, 2009. The petitioner appealed against the order of dismissal dated December 3, 2009 vide his appeal dated January 9, 2010 which was accepted by the Appellate Authority and the penalty of dismissal from service was converted into penalty of compulsory retirement vide order dated March 6, 2012. It is contended by Mr. Chaturvedi that the petitioner did not receive pension in the intervening period between December 12, 2009 to March 6, 2012 nor encashment of earned leave and gratuity was paid though, he stood compulsory retired. Mr. Chaturvedi contended that the chargesheets dated November 11, 2009 and May 31, 2013 were decided in terms of common order January 6, 2015, whereby it was decided to withhold permanently pension of the petitioner. He submitted that this order was passed by the Disciplinary Authority by showing disagreement with the findings of inquiry officer where honesty and integrity of the petitioner is not in doubt, was ove rruled. According to Mr. Chaturvedi, the Disciplinary Authority was required to issue a show-cause notice along with the note of disagreement before inflicting the penalty on the petitioner. In this regard, he has relied upon a Judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Punjab National Bank v. Kunj Bihari Mishra , 1998 7 SCC 84.