Bose, J. - (1.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari and a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ for quashing of an order of dismissal passed against the petitioner in certain departmental proceedings taken against the petitioner for misconduct in the discharge of his duties as an Engineer employed under the Damodar Valley Corporation and for prohibiting the opposite parties from giving effect to the said order of dismissal.
(2.) The petitioner who is a Bachelor of Science in Engineering of the University of Glasgow, was appointed as an Assistant Civil Engineer by the respondent Corporation for a term, of three years commencing from 22-8-1950 under an Agreement of Service entered into on 9-12-1950 on terms and conditions contained in the said Agreement. It is a term, of the said Agreement that the service of the petitioner might be terminated by the Corporation without previous notice if the Corporation was satisfied that the employee was unfit and was likely to continue as such for a considerable period by reason of ill-health, or if the Corpora- tion or its officers having proper authority, found the petitioner to be guilty of insubordination, intemperance or other misconduct or breach or non-performance of any of the provisions of the agreement. It is a further term of the said agreement that in respect of any matter for which no provision has been made in the agreement the provisions of the relevant rules or regulations of the Corporation would apply. In course of his employment as such Assistant Engineer the petitioner on or about 6-1-1951 was entrusted with the work of laying galvanised iron pipe lines for over a distance of about 5,000 running feet from the Barakar river to the Kumardhubi Power House & he was directed to complete the work within ten days from date. As the work was an urgent one the petitioner had to engage sufficient number of labourers who were paid from the Muster Roll at the usual rates of wages allowed by the respondent Corporation. It appears, however, that the petitioner succeeded in completing the work by 14-1-1951.
(3.) Some time thereafter the respondent had reason to suspect that the petitioner had not engaged all the labourers whose names had been entered in the Muster Roll and false entries were made in the Muster Roll with a view to misappropriate some money out of the amount that might be received from the Corporation on account of wages paid to the labourers engaged in such work and On or about 21-2-1951 the Executive Engineer who is respondent 4 threatened to report against the petitioner for the alleged misconduct to the Authorities concerned. On 7-3-1951 the petitioner showed cause against the allegations and charges made by the Executive Engineer in his said letter of 21-2-1951. On 21-3-1951 respondent 4 purporting to act under the order of the Corporation suspended the petitioner from service and served upon him a charge-sheet containing four heads of charges as set out in the petition and the petitioner was called upon to show cause why he should not be dismissed from service or why a lesser punishment should not be inflicted upon him on the said charges. On 28-3-1951, the petitioner by a letter of that date denied the charges levelled against him and showed cause against the said charges. As the Authorities did not accept the explanation offered by the petitioner, a departmental inquiry was directed by the Superintending Engineer who is respondent 3. Certain correspondence thereafter passed between the petitioner and the Authorities concerned in relation to the said enquiry and in course of such correspondence certain Questionnaire was submitted to the petitioner which is in Annexure 'H' of the petition. This Questionnaire indicates that it was contemplated that the petitioner would be entitled to put in a written statement of his defence and an oral enquiry would be held by the Authorities in respect of the charges and the petitioner would be allowed to attend such enquiry, engage the service; of a lawyer and would be afforded an opportunity of examining and cross-examining the witnesses tendered at such enquiry.;