Debasish Kar Gupta, J. - (1.) This writ application is directed against an order dated October 31, 2007 passed by the disciplinary authority against the Petitioner and order dated May 3, 2008 passed by the appellate authority upholding the order of the disciplinary authority.
(2.) The Petitioner was working for gain under the Respondent No. 2. While he was posted as Manager, Kalingpong, Sub -Branch of the Darjeeling Branch of the Respondent No. 2, he was served with a charge -sheet dated September 22, 2005. The Petitioner submitted his reply dated November 23, 2005 to the above chargesheet. An enquiry was conducted by the Respondent No. 6 in the above inquiry proceeding. He submitted his enquiry report to the disciplinary authority. A second show -cause notice dated October 7, 2006 was served upon the Petitioner with proposed punishment. By a communication dated October 16, 2006, the Petitioner prayed for supply of a copy of the enquiry report to him. Instead of supplying a copy of the enquiry report, the disciplinary authority passed the impugned order of punishment dated October 31, 2006 dismissing the Petitioner from the services of the Respondent bank. The Petitioner preferred an appeal dated June 28, 2007 before the appellate authority. By a communicated dated May 5, 2008 the Petitioner was informed that his appeal had been rejected by the appellate authority.
(3.) At the very out set, a preliminary objection is raised on behalf of the Respondents with regard to maintainability of this writ application. It is submitted by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents that the Respondent bank is a Co -operative Society and the same is not an instrumentality of State. According to him, the writ application was not maintainable. It is also submitted that the members of the General Body of the Respondent bank are not made parties to this writ application. So, the writ application is liable to be dismissed on the ground of non -joinder of parties.;