TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. N K SHANMUGHASUNDARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short but of late often raised question that arises for consideration in these cases is as to whether the failure to furnish a copy of the report of the Enquiry Officer to the delinquent employee in a disciplinary proceeding before the Disciplinary or the Punishing Authority, as the case may be, makes up its mind and records the finding of guilt as against him, would constitute violation of the principles of natural justice or the relevant statutory regulations" In the instant case, relevant regulations are "Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Employees "Discipline and Appeal Regulations (hereinafter referred to as The Regulations.

(2.) THE Writ Appeal No.1033 of 1990 has been filed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 31.7. 1990 in W.P.No.6487 of 1986 whereunder the learned Judge allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent herein seeking to quash the proceedings of the appellant in B.P.Ms. (FB) 46 (Administrative Branch), dated 5.6.1986 following his earlier order in W.P.No.2690 of 1986 dated 27. 6.1990. W.A.No.1142 of 1990 has been filed against the order in W.P.No.2690 of 1986 supra.

(3.) THEREUPON, the respondent filed W.P.No.6487 of 1986 praying for a writ of certiorari quash the proceedings dated 5.6.1986 dismissing the respondent from service. Apart from other grounds of challenge with which we are not concerned presently in the appeal before us, two of the grounds require to be mentioned. One of those grounds is that the minutes the Enquiry Officer or his findings was not furnished to the respondent and therefore he had no opportunity to rebut the charges. It was also contended that the order of dismissal was against the principles of natural justice and that he has not been given any opportunity before reversing the finding of the Enquiry Officer in respect of charge No.1. The second ground raised regarding the procedure adopted was based on Regulation No.8(b) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Employees" Discipline and Appeal Regulations. After referring the said Regulation, it was contended that the failure to issue a second show -cause notice and that though in respect of some of the employees, such a notice was being issued, in the case of the respondent, straightaway a dismissal order has been passed without any opportunity, that he should have been also given such an opportunity to state his case and the failure to do so, violated Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.