- (1.) This is an appeal against the judgment and order of Mr. Justice J.P. Mitter discharging the rule obtained by the Appellant on an application under Article 226 of the Constitution. The facts of the case are briefly stated as follows:
(2.) The Appellant, an employee of the Corporation of Calcutta, was a permanent Coal Inspector with effect from March 1, 1944. On September 8, 1953, he remained posted at Bhadreswar Ghat, Dist. 24 Parganas. The duty of the Appellant as Coal Inspector was to take delivery of coal wagons on behalf of the Corporation of Calcutta on their arrival, at Bhadreswar sidings after being satisfied that the said wagons contained coal according to specifications and thereafter to make over charge of wagons to the boat contractors for unloading and stocking the coal under their custody in the plots of the railway yard at Bhadreswar rented by the Corporation. According to the prevailing practice the boat contractors were to load their boats with coal from the said Corporation yard after-day-break and leave for Pulta Pumping Station, after taking challans from the Appellant whose duty before issue of every challan was to see that the coal in the boat was not soaked in the water or replaced by inferior quality of coal from other yards. The boat contractors were, thereafter, to take unloading certificates from the Pulta Pumping Station for every boat of coal unloaded there and to make over the same to the Appellant. While serving in the said capacity at Bhadreswar the Appellant received a letter dated April 15, 1954, from the Controller of Stores to the effect that the Commissioner of Corporation of Calcutta had suspended him by his order dated March 19, 1954, with immediate effect. By the same letter the Appellant was also asked to show why disciplinary action should not be taken against him on the following charges: (a) For allowing one, boat load of Corporation coal to be removed on 8;9.53 without entering the same in the challan. The boat load of coal was loss to the Corporation as the boat of coal neither reached Pulta nor returned to Bhadreswar. (b) For suppressing and not reporting to higher authorities information?s of similar thefts received by you on previous occasions as per your own admission. (c) For the loss of other two boat loads of coal on 8.9.53 which were entered in the challan but did neither reach Pulta nor returned to Bhadreswar.
(3.) The Appellant duly showed cause by two letters dated April 30, 1954 and May 26, 1954. On June 3, 1954, the Deputy Commissioner No. 11, the Respondent No. 4, held an enquiry relating to the said charges in the presence of the Appellant and the evidence was taken. Thereafter the Deputy Commissioner No. II submitted his report dated November 29, 1954, to the Commissioner holding him guilty of the said charges and recommending his dismissal. The Commissioner after perusal of the relevant records approved the recommendations made by the Deputy Commissioner and passed an order dated December 17, 1954, dismissing the Appellant. On January 7, 1954, the Appellant preferred an appeal to the Mayor against the said order of dismissal. The Appellant appeared before the Mayor on August 16, 1955, in connection with this appeal and by a letter dated September 12/13, 1955, addressed by the said Controller of Stores, the Appellant was informed that his appeal to the Mayor failed. Thereafter on or about September 4, 1956, the Appellant moved the present application under Article 220 before this Hon'ble Court. The said application was heard by Mitter, J. who dismissed the same.;