ANIL AGGARWAL Vs. ELECTRONICS SYSTEMS PUNJAB LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging order dated 23.6.1998 (Annexure P -8), whereby, he was dismissed from service.

(2.) CASE of the petitioner, in brief, is that he was a qualified Engineer and joined the respondents - Electronic Systems Punjab Limited in the year 1981. Petitioner got issued motherboard from Sub Store of Production Department on 14.8.1997. Inspection was carried out on 16.8.1997, while the petitioner was on leave and his side drawers of the table were opened. The competent authority had no authorisation for carrying out the inspection of the drawers of the petitioner at his back. In fact, the said proceedings had been carried out by none other than the President of the ESPL Technocrats Association and ESPL Workers Union. To justify the illegal removal of the motherboard respondent No.4 wrote a letter on 18.8.1997 to respondent No.3 that in view of the pressure of the employees and the representatives of the ESPL Technocrats Association and ESPL Workers Union, a search may be carried out to trace the motherboard. When the petitioner came to attend the office on 19.8.1997, he was detained at the security and was directed to proceed to the production department for search of the motherboard. Petitioner was suspended on 1.9.1997 under the pressure of the ESPL Technocrats Association and ESPL Workers Union. Chargesheet was also served on the petitioner. Petitioner submitted detailed reply to the chargesheet. However, the inquiry officer submitted the report against the petitioner qua charge No.1. The competent authority did not agree with the report of the inquiry officer with regard to exoneration of the petitioner qua charge No.2. Show cause notice dated 22.4.1998 was served on the petitioner. Petitioner submitted his detailed reply to the show cause notice. Despite the said fact, impugned order of dismissal was passed. Hence, the present petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order was liable to be set aside as the inquiry report was perverse and was based on no evidence. In fact, petitioner had been falsely involved in this case by the representatives of the ESPL Technocrats Association and ESPL Workers Union. Both the charges were not proved against the petitioner during inquiry. In support of his arguments, learned counsel has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Haryana Vidyut Parsaran Nigam Limited and another vs. Rajnish Garg, 2002 5 SLR 763, wherein, it was held as under: -