Girish Chandra Gupta, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against an order dated 4.6.1992 by which a learned Single Judge of this Court allowed the writ petition. The facts and circumstances of the case briefly stated are as follows:- The respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) an employee of the appellant Corporation working as a lino operator was charge-sheeted an suspended by an order dated 15.3.1980 on the ground that he assaulted one lino mechanic Sri Ravi Sadhukhan who was then on duty. By a letter dated 20.5.1980 the respondent denied the charges. An enquiry was thereafter held. The respondent was granted leave to engage a lawyer to defend him. A lawyer was in fact engaged by the respondent. The enquiry officer held that the charges levelled against the respondent were proved. Accordingly, the appellant by its order dated 31.5.1982 punished the respondent by suspending him from the work with effect from 7.6.1982 for a period of 3 months. He was directed to rejoin his duties with effect from 7.9.1982. No copy of the enquiry report was however furnished to the respondent. Subsistence allowance for the period commencing from 7.6.1982 to 6.9.1982 was also not paid to the respondent on the ground that the suspension was by way of punishment and therefore no subsistence allowance was payable to him.
(2.) On 13.10.1982 the respondent appears to have moved this Court challenging the charge sheet-cum-suspension order dated 15.3.1980 and the final order of punishment dated 31.5.1982.
(3.) A rule appears to have been issued as prayed for on 13.10.1982 itself. The petition ultimately was heard and disposed of by the impugned order dated 4.6.1982 by which a learned Single Judge held that the order of punishment could not be sustained inter alia on the ground that the defence case of the petitioner was not dealt with in the said order nor was the enquiry report furnished to the respondent. The order of punishment contained in the letter dated 31.5.1982 was set aside. The appellant was directed to give all service benefits including all monetary benefits to the respondent. It is against this order that the present appeal is directed.;