MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN Vs. BANK OF BARODA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is hereby assailing the correctness, propriety and legality of the order which has been passed by the learned Single Judge in Misc. Petition No. 686 of 1988 whereby the said writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed.

(2.) FEW facts need to be stated for the purpose of unfolding the matter. It was alleged in a domestic enquiry held against appellant that in May, 1984, the complainant had paid a sum of Rs. 500/- to the appellant and further sum of Rs. 250/- was agreed to be paid to the appellant on 10-7-1984. The appellant was caught red-handed at his residence while demanding and accepting Rs. 250/- from the said complainant Sukhlal as bribe and powdered currency notes were recovered from the left side of upper pocket of the bushshirt which the appellant was wearing at the relevant time. On the aforesaid charge an enquiry was held against the appellant and in the matter of that enquiry a charge-sheet was served on the appellant on 4-3-1985. During the course of said enquiry, the appellant prayed that he be permitted to take the assistance of a legal practitioner in the said enquiry by his letter dated 25-6-1986. Disciplinary Authority by order dated 11-7-1986 turned down his said request and informed the appellant that he was entitled to take assistance of another officer/employee of the Bank and defend himself in the said departmental enquiry. The defence representative of the appellant also filed an application before the Disciplinary Authority through Enquiry officer dated 6-8-1985 making a request that assistance of an advocate may be permitted to the appellant. That application was also rejected. The appellant did not challenge the said orders passed by the Disciplinary authority by filing writ petition at that time. He participated in the said enquiry which was concluded. On 12-9-1986 the Enquiry Officer found that the allegations made against the appellant were proved. The Disciplinary authority by order dated 2-3-1987 directed his dismissal from the service. The order dated 12-9-1986 passed by Disciplinary Authority (Annexure-K in the writ petition) and the order dated 2-3-1987 passed by the Appellate Authority (Annexure-M in the writ petition) were assailed by the appellant vide Misc. Petition No. 686/1988. The learned Single Judge dismissed the said writ petition.

(3.) SHRI B. L. Jain, counsel for the appellant and Shri C. M. Dagaonkar for the Bank have been heard. None appeared for the other respondents.