Debangsu Basak, J. - (1.) An order of punishment affirmed by the appellate authority is under challenge in the present writ petition.
(2.) Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the disciplinary proceeding is a product of mala fides. He submits that, the petitioner made complaints with regard to certain ill workings at a branch to the authorities. As a counterblast to such complaints, the authorities embarked upon the disciplinary proceedings. He draws the attention of the Court to the litigation initiated by the petitioner. He submits that, since the disciplinary proceedings are vitiated by mala fides, the same should be quashed. Referring to the disciplinary proceedings itself, he submits that, the changes were not proved. The petitioner was not allowed to take inspection of certain documents, although asked for. The appellate authority did not afford the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Therefore, on the ground of the breach of principles of natural justice, the order of the disciplinary authority as affirmed by the appellate authority stands vitiated.
(3.) Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner refers to a writing dated September 10, 2012 and submits that, although, a punishment of withholding of three increments have been passed, the authorities have refused to grant or disburse further increments. According to him, the petitioner is now being punished without an order of punishment being in place so far as withholding of further increments are concerned.;