A.K.Banerjee, J. - (1.) The entire disciplinary proceedings as well as the order of the disciplinary authority affirmed by the order of the appellate authority were impugned before this Court in C. O. 8225(W) of 1987. The said writ petition was disposed of by Mahitosh Mazumdar, J. (as His Lordship then was) by a judgment and order dated 12th August, 1988. His Lordship held that the order of the appellate authority was bad in view of the rule 32(ii) and as such gave liberty to the petitioner to file a supplementary appeal before the appellate authority and directed the appellate authority to dispose of the same in terms of the said rules. The said order of His Lordship was appealed against by the writ petitioner. The Court of appeal by an order dated 14th June, 1995 upheld the order of the learned single Judge and directed the appellate authority to consider the appeal of the writ petitioner if filed in terms of the liberty granted by the single Judge.
(2.) In terms of the liberty given by this Court a supplementary appeal was preferred. The appellate authority by a reasoned order dated 24th January, 1996 rejected the appeal of the petitioner. The order of the appellate authority appearing at pages 212 to 214 of the writ petition has been impugned before me.
(3.) Although several grounds have been taken and points have been agitated by the writ petitioner attacking the proceedings as well as the order of the disciplinary authority, in my view, the scope of this application has been narrowed down in view of the finality reached to the said effect in the earlier writ proceedings. I am only to examine as to whether the appellate authority has disposed of the appeal in terms of the direction of this Court given earlier.;