KAMLESH SHARMA,J - (1.) This appeal is directed against the decree and judgment dated 23 -3 -1993 passed by the District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala whereby the appeal of the respondent -defendant bank was allowed and the decree and judgment dated 31 -8 -1992 of the Senior Sub -Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala was set aside and the plaint of the appellant -plaintiff was rejected under Order VII, Rule 11 (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure. Hence, the present regular second appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the appellant -plaintiff.
(2.) At the time of admission, the following substantial questions of law were framed : -
(3.) The brief facts of the case are that the appellant -plaintiff was appointed as a clerk -cum -supervisor with the respondent -defendant bank on 15 -5 -1982. On 18 -4 -1985 he was served with a charge -sheet containing 18 charges and was called upon to file reply thereto within a period of two weeks. On failure to file the reply within the stipulated period, his services were terminated on 27 -5 -1985. However, in the appeal preferred by the appellant -plaintiff, the Board of Directors of the respondent -defendant bank revoked the order dated 27 -5 -1985, as conveyed by the General Manager of the respondent -defendant bank on 186 -1985 and the appellant -plaintiff was reinstated, Again, on 24 -6 -1.985, the appellant -plaintiff was informed that an Enquiry Committee consisting of S/Shri Baldev Raj, Kashmir Singh Rana and N C. Katoch would enquire into the charges against him. On the objection raised by the appellant -plaintiff that Shri N C. Katoch, Zonal Manager of the respondent -defendant bank: was him self the complainant, he did not participate in the enquiry, which was conducted by other two members. As per the allegations of the appellant -plaintiff, he was not given opportunity to lead evidence in defence and the Enquiry Committee proceeded to give its report, on the basis of which the services of the appellant -plaintiff were again terminated by the Board of Directors on 26 -8 -1985. The termination order was given to him on 30 -8 -1985 According to the appellant -plaintiff, neither the copy of the enquiry report was supplied nor notice to show cause was served upon him before terminating his services.;