SANJIB BANERJEE, J. - (1.) The petitioner, then a Senior Assistant with the West Bengal State Electricity Board, was found to be involved in a case of theft of electricity which culminated in the conviction of the petitioner by an order of March 8, 2006. Following the conviction of the petitioner, the Board removed the petitioner from service by an order of March 16, 2006. It does not appear that the order of removal of the petitioner from service was upon the conclusion of any disciplinary action against the petitioner. The order of March 16, 2006 did not refer to any provision in the service regulations or other law permitting the summary removal from service of an employee upon conviction, whether on the ground of theft of electricity or otherwise.
(2.) The petitioner did not protest the order of his removal from service other than to make an appeal to the employer to reconsider the position since the petitioner had preferred an appeal or intended to prefer an appeal from the order of conviction. The relevant request of the petitioner for reconsideration of 'he matter was dealt with by the employer 's reply of May 19, 2006, the operative part whereof reads as follows; "...But the authority after due consideration of all perspective find no extenuating grounds to reconsider or rescind the punishment imposed upon him ... till his conviction and sentence is set-aside by the Hon 'ble High Court, Calcutta. "
(3.) The petitioner 's appeal has recently been decided on August 31, 2015 and the petitioner has been acquitted of the charges and the order of conviction set aside. The petitioner says that in view of the representation of the employer as contained in the letter of May 19, 2006, the employer should reconsider the matter in the light of the High Court 's order of acquittal and take appropriate steps.;