P S THAPAR Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY WAY OF THE PRESENT PETITION, PETITIONER PRAYS THAT MANDAMUS BE ISSUED QUASHING THE REPORTS SUBMITTED BY THE ENQUIRY COMMITTEE ON 6.4.2001 AND 14.6.2001. MANDAMUS IS ALSO SOUGHT FOR QUASHING ORDER DATED 15.12.2001, BY WHICH ORDER THE DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY, CONSIDERING THE REPORT DATED 14.6.2001 AND AGREEING WITH THE FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE ENQUIRY COMMITTEE IMPOSED THE PUNISHMENT OF 'REDUCTION OF BASIC PAY TO THE MINIMUM IN THE GRADE WITHOUT RESTORATION' UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF AIR INDIA EMPLOYEES SERVICE REGULATIONS. QUASHING OF THE ORDER DATED 23/29.4.2002 PASSED BY THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY REJECTING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY HAS ALSO BEEN PRAYED FOR. FURTHER ORDER SOUGHT TO BE QUASHED IS ORDER DATED 12/20.11.2002 DISMISSING ANOTHER APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SECRETARY AND DIRECTOR CORPORATION AFFAIRS. QUASHING OF THE LETTER DATED 20/26.12.2002 IS ALSO PRAYED FOR. BY SAID LETTER PETITIONER WAS INFORMED THAT SINCE PETITIONER WAS GROUNDED AS A RESULT OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS PENDING AGAINST HIM, HE DID NOT HAVE ACTIVE FLYING DUTIES FOR 150 DAYS. GRIEVANCE IS THAT PETITIONER'S FLYING TRAINING WAS DELAYED DUE TO THE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AND SINCE THE ENQUIRY WAS TO BE QUASHED, PETITIONER'S GROUNDING MUST BE HELD TO BE INVALID AND AS A RESULT LETTER DATED 20/26.12.2002 BE QUASHED.

(2.) MR.HUZEFA AHMEDI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER, DURING ARGUMENTS LAUNCHED A THREE PRONGED ATTACK WHICH REQUIRES TO BE NOTED AT THE INCEPTION FOR THE REASON, I WOULD BE REFERRING TO ONLY SUCH RECORD AS RELATES ITSELF TO THE CHALLENGE LAID.

(3.) THREE-FOLD CHALLENGE WAS :-