PURNACHANDRA DASH Vs. STATE OF ORISSA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA, PLANNING AND COORDINATION DEPARTMENT AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this application is to the order under Annexure -19 dated 21st of June, 1975, by which the State Government have imposed punishment on the Petitioner in a disciplinary proceeding. The impugned order reads thus:

(2.) IN the writ application challenge against the punishment was advanced on several grounds:

(3.) ALLEGATION of bias against the enquiring officer has remained a bare allegation and there is really no material to support it. Prejudice on account of withholding representation through a lawyer has not been seriously pressed before us in view of the fact that the charge was simple, the evidence was also brief and Petitioner was sufficiently educated and had experience or life where by himself he could cross -examine witnesses supporting the charges and lead evidence in his own favour. There is also no clear material on record to show the antecedents of the marshalling officer. The rest of the contentions are essentially factual. Ordinarily, we would not have interfered in a case of this type. We have, however, a feeling that undisputed facts have not been taken note of in coming to the conclusion that Petitioner was guilty of the charge. As already pointed out, the order dated 3rd September, 1973 of the Planning & Coordination Department contained the following direction: