TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY, J. - (1.) THIS Writ application has been preferred challenging the showcause notice dated 29th April, 2004, the charge -sheet dated 5th October, 2004, the enquiry report dated 27th March, 2007, the second show -cause notice dated 20th August, 2007, the order of the disciplinary authority dated 3rd July, 2008 and the appellate authority order dated 13th March, 2009.
(2.) THE facts, in a nutshell, are that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Guard under Kolkata Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the KMC) and thereafter by dint of his merit he availed promotion the post of Sergeant on 17th November, 1998. As a bolt from the blue the petitioner was issued a showcause notice dated 29th April, 2004 asking the petitioner to answer to the allegations to the effect that he had availed 27 days Compensatory Casual Leave (hereinafter referred to as CCL) in 2002 and 31 days CCLs up to November, 2003 without prior approval and sanction and that the said CCLs were obtained against off days of previous Calendar year and that the petitioner did not comply with the directives of the Superintendent and did not rectify himself. The said show -cause notice was replied to by the petitioner on 4th May, 2004. Thereafter, in contemplation of a disciplinary proceeding, the petitioner was placed under suspension by a memorandum dated 10th June, 2004. The charge -sheet was thereafter issued on 5th October, 2004 and by a memorandum dated 5th October, 2004 itself, the order of suspension was withdrawn and the petitioner was allowed to join. The petitioner replied to the charge -sheet and also made an application on 14th October, 2004 to the Special Officer (market) of KMC requesting him to give information pertaining to his Service Book and the Attendance Register of the year 2002 -2003. Subsequent thereto, the enquiry officer was appointed on 20th November, 2005 and the said enquiry was concluded through filing of the enquiry report on 27th March, 2007 which was duly replied to by the petitioner. The petitioner was thereafter served a second show -cause notice dated 20th August, 2007, proposing to impose the following punishments : - 1. Demotion to the rank just below the post he is currently holding. 2. Treatment of suspension period as such. The petitioner replied to the same on 3rd September, 2007 and the disciplinary authority passed the order of punishment on 3rd July, 2008 imposing the following punishments : - 1. 2 (two) increments of pay of Sri Anjan Kumar Bhattacharjee, Sergeant, Market Department be withheld with cumulative effect. 2. The period spent by him under suspension be treated as such. Aggrieved by the said order of the disciplinary authority the petitioner preferred the statutory appeal on 7th August, 2008, and the same was considered and the punishment imposed was modified as follows : - 1. 1(one) increment of pay of the C.O. be withheld with cumulative effect. 2. The period spent by him under suspension be treated as such. Mr. Goswami, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the information as sought for, pertaining to the Service Book and the Attendance Register of the year 2002 - 2003, was not communicated to the petitioner and that as such the petitioner's right to contest the enquiry was prejudiced and the nonsupply of the said documents tantamounts to blatant violation of the principles of natural justice. Mr. Goswami further argues that the enquiry report is absolutely perverse and no nexus could be established by the enquiry officer between the charges alleged and the petitioner.
(3.) MR . Goswami, placing reliance upon a circular No.11/88 -89, argues that as per the said circular the leave availed by the petitioner was a sanctioned leave.;