Satyabrata Sinha, J. - (1.)In all these applications, a common question of law has been raised, and as such, these applications are being disposed of together.
(2.)The petitioners are workmen working in Kalidaspur Colliery belonging to Eastern Coalfields Limited, which is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The contentions of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that there has been violation of the principles of natural justice, in as much as, in some matters, documents asked for by them in the departmental proceedings have not been furnished. Further contention of the learned Counsel is that the petitioners are going to be dismissed from service without supplying copies of the enquiry reports submitted to the disciplinary authority by the Enquiry Officer, which is mandatory, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad v. B. Karunakar, reported in (1994-I-LLJ-162), and the decision in the case of Committee of Management Kisan Degree College v. Shambhu Saran Pandey reported in 1995(1) SLR 31.
(3.)Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Eastern Coalfields Limited, however, submits that the enquiry proceedings are still continuing, and the petitioners, in the event charges against the petitioners are held to be proved by the Enquiry Officer in the said enquiry, copies of the enquiry report would be supplied to them.
;