VARINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order terminating his services, the order passed by the Appellate Authority rejecting his appeal against the termination order and the order rejecting his Review Petition filed by him seeking review of the order passed by the Appellate Authority. The petitioner has further prayed for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to reinstate him with all consequential benefits.

(2.) THOUGH the writ petition had been filed with regard to the above prayers, today Mr. G.S. Bhatia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, at this stage, restricts his challenge to the order passed by the Appellate Authority, rejecting the appeal of the petitioner (Annexure P -20) and submits that the same was liable to be set aside as the same was tainted with bias. It was submitted that the punishment order was passed by the Managing Director, Ashok Kumar Goel, who was also one of the three Members of the Appellate Authority, which dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that the order dated 11.04.2008 (Annexure P -22) dismissing the Review Petition filed by the petitioner seeking review of the appellate order was considered and decided by only one of the Members of the Appellate Authority which comprised of five Members, and therefore, was unsustainable.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance, have also gone through the record of the case.