NOTIFIED AREA COMMITTEE Vs. MAHAVIR PARSHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two Regular Second Appeals No. 2114 and 2115 of 1978, otherwise disposable by a learned single Judge, were referred to Division Bench by me as there arose for decision two significant questions of law and the decisions of various High Courts thereon were not uniform. These questions can be formulated thus:

(2.) THE facts relevant to the aforesaid propositions are not in dispute and can be stated thus:

(3.) SHRI Chhaju Ram Octroi Superintendent on 2nd November, 1974 had filed a complaint against the Respondents. Sub -Divisional Magistrate constituted one -man committee and after obtaining the advice of the Legal Advisor of the Committee directed the recording of the statements of the Octroi Superintendent and Tonga Driver. On the basis of the said statements, the charge -sheets were served upon the Respondents which was accompanied by a show -cause notice regarding the proposed punishment of dismissal. The Respondents filed their replies to the charge -sheets served on them. Thereafter, a regular inquiry was conducted by Shri Neseem Ahmed and therein he recorded the statements of many witnesses. After the completion of the inquiry, the order of termination was passed on 27th January, 1975 without issuing a fresh show -cause notice.