Shivaraj V. Patil, J. - (1.) In this appeal, the appellant has assailed the resolution of the respondent dated 12-5-1996 withdrawing his enrolment as well as the order of the High Court upholding it.
(2.) The facts, which are considered necessary and relevant for the purpose of dispose of this appeal, are the following : After securing LL.B. in 1975-76 the appellant was appointed as Assistant (Legal) by the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board (for short 'the Board'). The said post was re-designated as "Law Officer Grade-II' in 1978. The Board, by its order dated 6-9-1983 allowed the appellant to act as an Advocate of the Board and also ordered that the expenditure of his getting licence from the Bar Council shall be met by the Board. His application seeking enrolment was sent by the Secretary of the Board to the respondent on 13-10-1983. The Secretary of the respondent by letter dated 28-3-1984 informed the Board that the Office Order dated 6-9-1983 of the Board did not meet the requirements of the Rules and that the appellant should, first be designated as a Law Officer. The respondent also requested the Board to send the order of appointment and the terms of such appointment of the appellant. The Board by order dated 11-6-1984 modified the earlier order dated 6-9-1983 and declared the appellant as a Law Officer of the Board. On 5-7-1984 another order was passed by the Board by changing the designation of the post of 'Law Officer Grade-II' as 'Law Officer'. It is, thereafter, the respondent issued a certificate of enrolment dated 9-7-1984 to the appellant. By Office Order dated 8-5-1991 the appellant was given ad hoc promotion to the post of Under Secretary (Legal)-cum-Law Officer, which order also stated that he would continue to work in the Legal Cell of the Secretariat of the Board. Further on 14-1-1993 he was promoted as Under Secretary (Legal)-cum-Law Officer on officiating basis.
(3.) By its communication dated 13-9-1993 the respondent called upon the appellant to appaer before the Committee on 28-9-1993 along with all connected documents/evidence in regard to his enrolment as an Advocate. The said communication indicated that in the meeting held on 10-7-1993 the respondent considered the matter regarding enrolment of certain Law Officers and decided to constitute a committee to examine the same. Thereafter on 27-12-1993 a show cause notice was sent to the appellant requiring him to explain as to why his enrolment No. HIM/35/1984 issued to him be not withdrawn. Reply to the said show cause notice was to reach by 30-12-1993. After taking extension of time twice the appellant sent a communication on 25-2-1994 stating that there was no ground for withdrawal of his enrolment reserving his right to file a detailed reply. He also stated that he would like to be represented by an Advocate.;