AMRESHWAR PRATAP SAHI, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri R.C. Kumar Nagvanshi, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents
(2.) THE petitioner who was working as a Establishment Clerk in Block Barahani, District Chandauli has been subjected to disciplinary proceedings and according to the respondents since the charges were found to be proved against the petitioner he has been reverted to the post of Junior Clerk. It is this order of reversion which was subjected to appeal and the appeal has also been dismissed as a result whereof the present writ petition has been filed. The primary argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner to impeach the order is that the entire disciplinary proceedings are vitiated for not having held the inquiry in accordance with rules inasmuch after filing of the reply by the petitioner to the charge sheet, no inquiry was conducted by the Enquiry Officer who submitted an ex-parte inquiry report and the disciplinary authority without supplying a copy of the said inquiry report has proceeded to pass the impugned order.
(3.) THE submission in essence is that holding of an inquiry was a must keeping in view the nature of the charges and witnesses were required to be examined which opportunity was not only denied to the petitioner but even conversely the respondents also failed to produce any evidence to that effect. It is further submitted that the inquiry report which was submitted did not form part of the show cause notice issued to the petitioner and non supply of the inquiry report to the petitioner has prejudiced the claim which was to be adjudicated upon inquiry.;