JAYRAM PAMAVATAR BRAMBHATT Vs. SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) <DJG>BHAGWATI PRASAD, J.</DJG> Heard learned counsel for the parties. The order of learned Single Judge was read to us, and in this order, the learned Single Judge was constrained to observe that in second call, the learned counsel for the petitioner had remained absent. Therefore, the Court had proceeded to decide the petition.

(2.) The appellant was a Chowkidar, appointed with respondent Trust. The chargesheet was issued to him on 5.1.1996. On 15.1.1996, the notice was issued and, thereafter, inquiry proceeded and the inquiry was conduced on 24.6.1996. The charges levelled against the delinquent were held proved. According to the Tribunal, there was no infirmity in the inquiry so conducted. The entire procedure, as prescribed in law, was followed, and not only that, the order which was finally passed was after the inquiry report was sent to the Vice-Chancellor of the University for approval, which was approved by the Vice-Chancellor. Hence, the order of dismissing the appellant from service was passed and upheld by the Tribunal.

(3.) The learned Single Judge has also dealt with the question and have found that serious charges of insubordination and indiscipline were there, which we are delineating hereinafter. For ready reference, about 14 instances were quoted by the Inquiry Officer, of serious dereliction of duties of the appellant, which are mentioned hereunder:-