GEORGE A.E.PAUL Vs. BHARATH DYNAMICS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of Certiorari declaring the order No.BDL/6074/36191/2K dt:26.02.2000 of the Deputy General Manager (P&A), Bharat Dynamics Limited (for short "BDL"), Bhanur, Medak and the circular passed in proceedings No.BDL/04/51/32/C - P & A dt:21.10.1994 as illegal, unconstitutional and void.

(2.) The petitioner's case is that he was initially appointed as Assistant Manager (Security and Fire) by the respondent No.1. Later he was promoted as Deputy Manager (P & A) (Grade III) in the year 1994 and was posted as Deputy Manager (EA & SEC) in July, 1996. In January, 1998, the charge sheet vide proceedings No.BDL/Pers/K -191/98 was issued to the petitioner stating that he was absent without any sanctioned leave for 26 days between 01.03.1997 to 15.09.1997 in different spells and was also absent for 8 days in all between 01.12.1997 to 15.09.1998. The Deputy General Manager (P&A), BDL by order dt:11.02.1998 awarded a minor punishment of censure. The petitioner preferred an Appeal before the General Manager, BDL and the same was dismissed by proceedings dt:27.03.1998.

(3.) The Respondents filed their counter and opposed the petition. It is contended that the petitioner earlier filed W.P.No.16204 of 1998 questioning the charge sheet issued by the Management even before the enquiry was conducted. Initially stay was granted and later vacated and writ petition itself was dismissed. Aggrieved, he preferred W.A.No.745 of 1999 which was also dismissed. He preferred one more W.P.No.26447 of 1999 and on 13.03.2000, the said Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn giving liberty to the petitioner to seek remedies at the departmental level. Thus in the earlier round of litigation, both the writ petitions filed by the present petitioner were dismissed and this is the third round of litigation.