Brijesh Kumar, J. - (1.) UNDER challenge, in this writ petition is the order dated 17.2.1993 passed by the Managing Director, U. P. Export Corporation Limited, opposite party No. 2, removing the petitioner from service and the order dated 13.8.1993 dismissing the appeal.
(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. In brief, the facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Executive (Commercial) in the U. P. Export Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) on September 5. 1987 with posting at Gangotri Show Room at Lucknow. After his postings at Agra and Bombay, he was transferred and posted as Executive Incharge of Show Room of the Corporation at Bangalore. At Bangalore, internal audit had taken place wherein some discrepancies in the accounts were found and according to the petitioner, he probed into the matter and the Accountant who was found at fault had made good the amount found short. The petitioner, it is contended, reported the matter to the General Manager of the Corporation at Kanpur by means of a letter dated 30.3.1992, copy of which has been filed as Annexure -2 to the writ petition. Further follow -up actions were also taken up by the petitioner. Ultimately Sri A. V. Singh. General Manager of the Corporation and Sri K. K. Krishnan, Chief Manager (Finance) visited Bangalore and held an enquiry into the affairs and submitted their report dated 14.5.1992, copy of which has been filed as Annexure -4 to the writ petition. The report recommended disciplinary action against certain persons including the petitioner. The petitioner was placed under suspension by order dated 20/21.5.1992 under the orders of the Managing Director of the Corporation, copy of which has been filed as Annexure -5 to the writ petition. By the same order. A. V. Singh, General Manager was appointed as enquiry officer to conduct enquiry against the petitioner. The enquiry officer was to serve the charge -sheet after approval of the same by the Managing Director. A copy of the charge -sheet, served upon the petitioner by the enquiry officer has been filed as Annexure -6 to the writ petition. It contains several charges including charges of embezzlement, gross negligence and dereliction of duties. The petitioner's case is that several documents were not supplied to him despite repeated requests but he had to submit his reply since it was given out that the proceedings otherwise be taken ex parte. A copy of his reply dated August 20, 1992 has been filed as Annexure -13 to the writ petition. Ultimately the petitioner was served with the impugned order dated 17.2.1993 removing him from service and further holding him liable, along with others, jointly and severally, to make good the loss of Rs. 1,11,000 suffered by the Corporation due to negligence and dereliction of duty on the part of the petitioner. A copy of the enquiry report dated 24.12.92 was also enclosed along with the order of punishment filed as Annexure -18 to the writ petition.
(3.) THE order of punishment has been challenged on behalf of the petitioner on the grounds that the enquiry was conducted in utter violation of the principles of natural justice as A. V. Singh could not be appointed as enquiry officer, the charge -sheet served upon the petitioner was not approved by the appointing authority, namely, the Managing Director : the enquiry report was also not furnished before -inflicting the punishment upon the petitioner and that no oral evidence was adduced during the enquiry proceedings and the witnesses, whose statements were relied upon, should have been allowed to be cross -examined by the petitioner, which opportunity was not provided.;