Jainendra Kumar Ranka, J. - (1.) Plaintiff-Respondent instituted a suit for declaration and receipt of back wages and other benefits against the defendantappellant on 21/02/1987 with the assertion that while he was employed on the post of driver in the Corporation, defendant No.1, defendant No.2 served a charge-sheet dt.23.07.1979 upon him whereupon Assistant Mechanical Engineer, Ajmer was appointed as the Enquiry Officer who submitted his report to defendant No.2. It was further asserted that defendant No.2 disagreed with such report and appointed one Shri T.C. Bhagat as Special Enquiry Officer. It was also asserted that a second charge-sheet No.382 dt. 11.06.1982 was also served upon the plaintiff by defendant No.2 and Shri T.C. Bhagat was again appointed as Enquiry Officer, who submitted his report to defendant No.3 whereupon vide order dt.29.11.1983 defendant No.3 terminated the services of the plaintiff. It was further asserted that against such termination order, plaintiff preferred an appeal before General Manager but the same was rejected vide order dt.22.02.1984. The plaintiff claimed that both these orders were void and ineffective and the main reasons were detailed as under:- "(i) that once enquiry was completed by Assistant Mechanical Engineer with respect to one charge, appointment of Shri T.C. Bhagat as Special Enquiry Officer was per se illegal and against the principles of natural justice. (ii) that the second charge-sheet was malafide and the plaintiff was not provided an opportunity to defend the same. (iii) that the joint report submitted by Shri T.C. Bhagat with respect to the two charge-sheets was illegal. (iv) that the copies of documents relied upon by the defendant was not provided to the plaintiff, nor finding of enquiry report was supplied to the plaintiff. Hence the plaintiff sought a declaration to the effect that his termination order dt.29.11.1983 as affirmed by Appellate order dt.22.02.1984 be declared void and ineffective, back wages and other benefits were also claimed.
(2.) The defendant-respondent entered appearance in suit and seriously refuted the allegation of the plaint by submitting written statement. It was asserted that no illegality was committed by appointing Shri T.C. Bhagat as Special Enquiry Officer and none of the principles of natural justice were violated as the plaintiff was provided ample opportunity to defend, that the plaintiff did not demand any document nor the departmental rule caste any mandatory obligation upon the defendants to supply copy of the same, that no prejudice was caused to the plaintiff as he preferred a departmental appeal where also he was unsuccessful. Objection with respect to jurisdiction of the Civil Court was also raised.
(3.) Based upon pleading, the following issues were framed by the Trial Court which reads as under :- img;