(1.) THIS writ application is directed against the disciplinary proceedings including the charge sheet, the order of suspension, the enquiry report, the order of punishment as contained in the writ petition. The said charge sheet was issued under the heading orders by the Executive Engineer Calcutta (Agri-Mechanical)Division, The petitioner replied to the charge sheet by letter dated 30/12/76, by the said letter, petitioner denied the allegations leveled against him thereat for the petitioner was served with an order of suspension dated 24th August, 1976. The petitioner was, theater, served with a notice as contained in Annexure IX to the application for vacating interim order
(2.) THE enquiry report shows that as regards charge no, 1 that the Presenting Officer could not produce any evidence as to whether sri Das was apprised of his conduct before recommending any punishment for discharge and warning should be given for improvement of Sri Das as regards, article of charge no. 2, the enquiry officer found "it is not convincing to me that such alleged non-procedural transaction of the store could run with interference of Sri Das. I detract to drag the issue in deviation from the original charge on the basis of such deposition of Sri Das which appears to me one pretext or another to evade the charge and delink his responsibility in the matter. As a store keeper he should have attached importance in transaction of store with his share of responsibility and he should he primarily responsible for any loss or deficiency in the store. There is no charge of this nature as was found. by the enquiry officer that as stores keeper the petitioner was attached with the trans faction of stores with his share of responsibility. Enquiry officer further recommended that Sri Das should be degraded to a post of lower responsibility in a lower pay scale as well as may be asked to make good the loss. Article of charge no. 3 was dealt with by the enquiry Officer. The enquiry officer did not reach his finding as regards the said charge. As regards article of charge no. 4 the Enquiry Officer found the charge to be untenable. As regards, article of charge no. 5 the enquiry Officer held I could not collect any record of evidence to contradict the defence of Sri Das Regarding article of charge no. 6, the Enquiry Officer held Regarding said other over writing I do not think it to be an act of bad intention of mischief. This is so far I had the privilege to consult papers and records. Thereafter, the petitioner was served with a second show-cause notice which is contained in Annexure X to the application for vacating order. The second show cause notice issued by Superintending Engineer reads thus :
(3.) THE final order passed by the Superintending Engineer dated 2 7th November, 1978 is as follows : -