- (1.) List revised. No one appears for the respondent. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. This second appeal was admitted on 19.7.1982 on the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether, the order of dismissal founded open an enquiry initiated by an authority not competent to do so is sustainable in law? 2. Whether, in the circumstances of the case the plaintiff respondent could be said to have been afforded a reasonable opportunity of defence? During arguments learned counsel for the appellant raised one more point hence appeal is proposed to be heard on the following third substantial question of law also (in accordance with the proviso to Section100(5) C.P.C.). 3. Whether the punishment of dismissal from service on the mis-conduct found proved is so dis-proportionate that it shocks the conscious of the court and is liable to be set aside on the said ground?
(2.) In the opinion of the court the above substantial question of law is essential for complete adjudication of the dispute between the parties.
(3.) Appellant was confirmed fitter in the Central Railways. His services were terminated on 24.9.1976. He sought a declaration in the suit giving rise to the instant appeal to the effect that termination order was illegal and beyond jurisdiction.;