RAMESHWAR Vs. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ASHOK Bhushan, J. Heard Sri B. N. Singh, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner and Sri Satya Prakash, Advocate appearing for the respondents.

(2.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for writ of 'certiorari' quashing the order dated 3/4th October, 1996 dismissing the petitioner from service, order dated 9th January, 1996 rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner and the order dated 28th September, 1998 rejecting the review petition filed by the petitioner. Other consequential reliefs have also been sought.

(3.) SRI Satya Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the respondents refuting the submissions of the counsel for the petitioner, contended that the charges levelled against the petitioner were fully substantiated by the documents which were mentioned in the charge-sheet itself. It was not necessary for the department to lead oral evidence to prove the charges when the charges stood substantiated by the documents itself. He further contended that no examination of any witness was inconsequential since the documents, which were nothing but letters, complaints and memos written in the official course of business, were fully reliable. It was contended that petitioner was given full opportunity to inspect the documents but the petitioner deliberately avoided to appear in the enquiry.