ANIL KOTHARI Vs. MEWAR ANCHALIK GRAMIN BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) INSTANT writ petition arises out of the judgment of learned Single Judge dt. 3rd August, 1999 passed in writ petition No. 3253/98.

(3.) LEARNED Single Judge upheld the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant that the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority, who was not an Enquiry Officer, was not speaking order and therefore the matter must be heard and decided by the Disciplinary Authority once again. However, while coming to this conclusion and directing the Disciplinary Authority to make orders denovo the learned Single Judge went on to observe about the fairness of enquiry conducted by the Enquiry Officer. Fairness of the Enquiry Officer itself is a subject matter of objection taken by the petitioner against the final order which he wants to canvass before the Disciplinary Authority. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner if the observation made by learned Single Judge and other directions about the orders that may be made by disciplinary authority are allowed to stand, the direction given by this Court to the Disciplinary Authority about the deciding that the objections raised by the appellant would be redundant exercise. The freedom of disciplinary authority in reaching his own conclusions after hearing the petitioner and make appropriate orders in accordance with his own decision and discretion shall be illusive so also opportunity given to the petitioner to canvass validity of his objections and defences.