Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J. - (1.) IN the present case, the writ petitioner was offered appointment in the post of Management Trainee of Damodar Valley Corporation on 18th August, 1989 and pursuant to the said offer, writ petitioner joined as Trainee on 7th September, 1989.
(2.) ON 17th July, 1996, the Disciplinary Authority of the respondent/writ petitioner issued the charge -sheet alleging that the at the time of making application for the post of Management Trainee, said respondent/writ petitioner did not disclose that she was lacking requisite qualifications for the said post. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid charge -sheet issued by the Disciplinary Authority for initiating disciplinary action, respondent/writ petitioner filed the writ petition which was finally disposed of by the learned Single Judge by the judgment and order under appeal.
(3.) IT has been submitted on behalf of the appellant -Corporation that only the charge -sheet was issued calling upon the respondent/writ petitioner to reply to the breach of the Damodar Valley Corporation Service (Conduct) Regulations, 1955 as specifically mentioned in the said charge -sheet. Mr. Mullick, learned Senior Counsel representing the appellant -Corporation submitted that filing of the writ petition challenging the charge -sheet is neither desirable nor permissible in law and on that ground alone, the writ petition should have been rejected. Mr. Mullick referred to and relied on a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Brooke Bond Lipton India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income -Tax and others reported in : 222 I.T.R. 540.;