BIPUL CHANDRA TAMULY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner by this writ application has basically challenged the order dated 22.3.1999 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Nagaon imposing punishment on the petitioner on the basis of the disciplinary enquiry initiated against him pursuant to the show cause notice dated 3.10.1997 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition).

(2.) I have heard Mr. A.K. Purkayastha, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.K. Bora, learned State counsel appearing for the respondents.

(3.) The writ petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner imposing punishment on the ground of violation of the mandatory provision of Rule 9 of the Assam Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964 and also on the ground that the disciplinary authority before passing the impugned order of punishment has not supplied the enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer so as to enable the writ petitioner to make a representation against the said report which caused prejudice to him. The further submission of Mr. Purkayastha is that he was not informed about the enquiry proceedings and the said enquiry was conducted behind his back.