A.K.Banrjee, J. - (1.) The petitioner was a probationer in the Great Eastern Hotel, a State Government Undertaking. The writ petitioner, while on probation, was asked to show cause on several irregularities pointed out by the authority. He was ultimately removed from service. He came up by way of writ proceeding. This Court by an order dated September 11, 2001 quashed the order of removal from service on the ground that even if the was a probationer, once charge was inflicted upon him, it was incumbent upon the authority to conduct a regular disciplinary proceeding by giving him reasonable opportunity of hearing. The authority thereafter gave personal hearing to the writ petitioner and passed a reasoned order of removal from service.
(2.) The learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner, has assailed the order of removal on three counts- (i) No copy of the enquiry report was ever given to the petitioner; (ii) Since the disciplinary authority discharged with the finding of the Enquiry Officer, he should have given an opportunity of hearing; (iii) No second show cause notice was issued to him.
(3.) Mr. Chandra in support of this writ application, relying on two Apex Court decisions in the cases of R.R. Gabhane v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. (1999)8 SCC 549 and Yoginath D. Bagde v. State of Maharshtra & Anr. 1999(2) CLR 971 and (1999)7 SCC 739 submits that the order of removal is bad in law as it vitiates the principles of natural justice as enunciated by the Apex Court.;