BHARAT DYNAMICS LIMITED HYDERABAD Vs. MEHTAB ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondentinW.P.No. 14173 of 1986,outof which judgment this appeal arose, is the appellant. The writ petitioner-respondent herein was made to face a disciplinary enquiry on the allegation of being found carrying two Vernier Calipers belonging to the appellant, handed over to him by Mr. B.N.K. Jain, another employee, with a view to commit theft, and that the conduct constituted misconduct under Standing Order No. 26 (2) of the Company Standing Orders. The charge against Mr. B.N.K. Jain was that he had stolen two Vernier Calipers belonging to the appellant on 2-7-1986 taking those out from the locker at about 17-20 hours, and handing over to the respondent at the Dabha Canteen, with a view to commit theft. The charge against both the employees was enquired into by an Enquiry Officer, who came to the finding of Mr. B.N.K. Jain of being not guilty of theft but guilty of only possessing/ transferring a vernier calipers having marking BDL codes markings and the other vernier calipers without any BDL codes but with erassive marks withou t any documents and was caught in the premises of BDL. There were no documental record of loss of Calipers from the tool crib or complaint to security officer from any individual or any eye-witness for his committing theft.

(2.) So far as the respondent is concerned, the finding of the Enquiry Officer was that the charge against him had not been fully proved as regards theft or abetment of it, but he was found guilty of possessing one Vernier Calipers with BDL codes and another Vermier Calipers without any markings without any proper documents and was caught by Security Officer.

(3.) After receiving the Enquiry Officer's report, the General Manager (Production) issued a show-cause notice dated 1-9-1986 to the respondent for his removal from service, after having accepted the findings of the Enquiry Officer that the respondent was found in possession of one Vernier Calipers belonging to the BDL unauthorisedly and was carrying it without any valid gate pass. The notice stated that therefore he was guilty of misconduct of theft under Standing Order No. 26 (2) of the Company. After the respondent submitted his explanation, he was removed from service.