- (1.) Special leave granted.
(2.) The respondent was working as Assistant Manager (Depot) with the Food Corporation of India. He was charge-sheeted on 3/03/1987 and disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him. The Inquiry Officer found the charges proved against him and as a consequence the disciplinary authority by the order dated 29/09/1988 dismissed the respondent from service. He challenged the order of dismissal before the High court on the following three grounds: (1 There has been violation of the principles of natural justice. The In- quiry Officer and the punishing authority being different he was entitled to a copy of the inquiry report before imposing the punishment of dismissal. (2 The inquiry report was based on extraneous material. Maithey's report which finds mention in the charge-sheet was neither brought on the 401 record nor copy of the same was given to him. The said report was not even 3 placed before the appellate authority or the High court. (3 Copies of the relevant documents and material asked for by him, which were relevant for the defence, were not supplied. The action was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) Relying upon the judgment of this court in Union of India v. Mohd. Ramzan Khan the High court allowed the writ petition and set aside the order of dismissal on the short ground that the copy of the inquiry report was not supplied to the respondent.;