(1.) PETITIONER has challenged the order dated 18.8.1998. (Annexure 8) dismissing his appeal as also the order dated 10.6.1998 (Annexure -6) passed by respondent No. 2.
(2.) PETITIONER was chargesheeted on the ground of defalcation of customers money. He took part in the departmental proceeding. He was found guilty by the Enquiry Officer. Respondent No. 2 being the disciplinary authority passed impugned order. Petitioners appeal before the Board of Directors was also dismissed.
(3.) MR . Sahani then submitted that from the order dated 10.6.1998 passed by the disciplinary authority it does not appear that he has applied his mind to the case. He further submitted that even from the minutes (Annexure B) it does not appear that mind was applied by the Board of Directors.