SOMESHWAR LAL Vs. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner was charge -sheeted on account of his alleged misbehavior with his superiors on a date as mentioned in the charge -sheet. It was alleged that the petitioner on that fateful date while misbehaved with his superiors also used filthy language against them. The petitioner gave a reply to the charge -sheet and in that, he had stated that he did not use filthy language. At the same time, he said that his activities of that date were not aimed at his superior officers, but against the members of the rival union, who were seeking to interfere with the demonstration that the union of the petitioner was giving at that time.

(3.) ACCORDING to the writ petition, subsequent thereto, the enquiry report was submitted and on the basis thereof, a punishment order had been meted out, whereby four increments of the petitioner were reduced. Later on the petitioner was permitted to retire voluntarily and there is no dispute that the petitioner did take such voluntary retirement. In the writ petition, the petitioner has taken principally two grounds to attack the disciplinary proceedings. First is that the petitioner was pitted against a lawyer for the enquiry officer was a trained lawyer and accordingly, by refusing to permit him to appoint his chosen defence counsel, the authorities concerned vitiated the disciplinary proceedings by denying natural justice to the petitioner.