SIDDHARTH,J. - (1.) Heard Sri R.K. Yadav, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri U.S. Singh Visen, learned Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) The petitioner while working as conductor in the respondent corporation was charge sheeted by means of 2 charge sheets dated 03.1.1992, alleging irregularities and misconduct in issuing tickets to the passengers. The petitioner filed his replied dated 29.02.1992 and 06.04.1992 respectively to the 2 charge sheets. The Disciplinary Authority directed enquiry into the charges by appointing an Enquiry Officer who submitted his 2 enquiry reports dated 28.06.1993 and 02.06.1993. The respondent no.3, the disciplinary authority, passed punishment order dated 28.02.1995 against which the petitioner preferred a departmental appeal, which was rejected by the appellate authority by his order dated 27.10.1995 and by the Reviewing Authority by his order dated 08.10.1996.
(3.) The petitioner has submitted that the enquiry against him was illegal since he was not given any opportunity to examine and /or cross examination of any witness. The Enquiry Officer did not exhibit any material documents relied upon the respondents and none of the documents were proved. There was no monitory loss caused to the Corporation. None of the Drivers were examined in support of the charges nor the various checking authorities were examined before the Enquiry Officer. The entire enquiry was vitiated and the punishment order of removal passed on the basis of such enquiry was absolutely illegal.;