- (1.) Challenging the order of penalty dated 24.11.2000 and the appellate order dated 06.08.2004, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. The brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner was appointed as an Electrical Operative, Grade - III on 13.03.1970. A charge-memo was served upon the petitioner on 29.11.1999 and the petitioner submitted his reply however, a departmental proceeding was initiated for imposition of major penalty upon the petitioner. On conclusion of the enquiry, the enquiry report was submitted on 25.09.2000 whereunder the charge levelled against the petitioner was found proved. A copy of the enquiry report was served upon the petitioner and the petitioner submitted his reply to the second show-cause notice. The disciplinary authority agreed with the enquiry report whereunder it has been found that the petitioner had contracted the second marriage while his first wife was alive and therefore, he imposed a penalty of dismissal from service. The petitioner preferred an appeal however, it was dismissed by order dated 06.08.2004. In the aforesaid facts the petitioner has approached this Court.
(2.) A counter-affidavit has been filed stating that the petitioner admittedly contracted a second marriage without seeking permission of the department and therefore, in view of Clause 37 (xxiii) of standing order, the petitioner is liable to be proceeded for committing the said misconduct. After the enquiry, it was found that the petitioner contracted the second marriage while his first wife was alive and therefore, the charge against the petitioner was found proved. In these facts, the order of penalty dated 24.11.2000 was passed whereby the petitioner was dismissed from service. On consideration of the materials on record, the appellate authority also rejected the appeal preferred by the petitioner by order dated 06.08.2004 and therefore, this is not a matter which requires interference by this Court exercising the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents on record.;