Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J. - (1.) The writ petitioner is questioning the order of the Managing Director, the Calcutta Tramways Company (1978) Limited dated May 31, 2005 imposing on him the penalty of reversion. He did not prefer any appeal, and instead took out this writ petition questioning the order of the managing director who acted as the disciplinary authority.
(2.) In February, 2004 he was working in the company as a truckhand (I am told that in 1997 he was appointed in the company as a helper, and that subsequently he was promoted to the post of truckhand). On February 19, 2004 he applied for a new identity card on the ground that the old one had been lost by him. The application was accompanied by particulars of a general diary lodged by him with the Ekbalpore police station on February 18, 2004. Considering his application, the competent authority issued the new identity card on February 26, 2004.
(3.) On March 19, 2004 he applied for another identity card. In the application he said, "With due respect and humble submission I beg to state that my old identity Card has become in delapitated condition and photo is also defaced. As such, I am enclosing herewith one copy of my recent photo to facilitate you issue me a new Identity Card and oblige." On receipt of that application the authority issued a notice dated May 5, 2004 calling upon him to explain why disciplinary action should not be taken for seeking more than one identity card. By his reply dated May 13, 2004 he said, "I felt that if I receive one more I/Card, I shall be able to utilise the same in absence, of the another one in the event of loss or damage of the rent. So my conception was very wrong and I beg unqualified apology for my much work.";