HIRA LAL SHARMA Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THREE points are urged by learned counsel for the writ petitioner, and it is expressly stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has been instructed to press only said three points.

(2.) IT is firstly urged that, as pleaded in paragraph 19 of the writ petition, vide application dated August 08, 1998, the petitioner had requested the Inquiry Officer to be granted permission to examine two witnesses in defence i.e. Abul Shamam and Deepak Shamam, which request is stated to be ignored.

(3.) ORIGINAL record of inquiry has been produced in Court before us which evidences that after the charge memorandum dated May 08, 1998 was served upon the petitioner and he filed a response thereto on June 11, 1998, considering the response an Inquiry Officer was appointed vide order dated 16/17th June 1998, who served a notice of inquiry upon the petitioner requiring him to be present on July 02, 1998 and as recorded in the proceeding sheet dated July 02, 1998, after completing preliminary proceedings the Inquiry Officer commenced recording evidence thereafter and after the last witness of the prosecution was examined, the statement of the petitioner in defence was recorded on July 13, 1998. Proceedings were closed and the Inquiry Officer submitted the report on July 28, 1998 which was furnished to the petitioner for his response on August 07, 1998.