AMARESHWAR SAHAY, J. - (1.) THE amendment application filed by the petitioner dated 22.7.1997, which was directed to be heard at the time of final hearing is allowed and the amendment application is being treated as part of the main writ application.
(2.) THE petitioner was proceeded departmentally for the alleged misconduct in dereliction in duty and then after submission of the Enquiry Report, the disciplinary authority by order as contained in Annexure -12 to the writ application, dated 10.10.1996 imposed the punishment of dismissal from service. It appears that after the submission of the Enquiry Report by the Enquiry Officer a notice to show cause was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted his show cause on 18th of October, 1996 challenging the findings of the Enquiry Officer on various grounds including that he was not supplied with a copy of the Enquiry Report. From perusal of Annexure -12 i.e., the order of the disciplinary authority, which was passed on 10.10.1996, it appears that the said authority in his order has mentioned that on receipt of the Enquiry Report, Shri G.S. Prasad has been given an opportunity to show cause. His representation has been taken into consideration and no merit has been found to decide against the findings of the Enquiry Officer. I fail to appreciate as to how the disciplinary authority has mentioned in his order that he considered the representation filed by the petitioner, when admittedly, the show cause was filed by the petitioner on 13.10.1996 i.e., after date of the passing of the order by the disciplinary authority. The order passed by the disciplinary authority dated 10.10.1996 as contained in Annexure -12 to the writ application suffers from serious infirmity and total non -application of mind rather it can be said that it has been passed in a mechanical manner. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said order of dismissal passed against him filed an appeal as contained in Annexure -13 to the writ application before the General Manger, Sayal Area (S), Hazaribagh, which was disposed of by an order as contained in Annexure -17 to the Amendment application on 28.1.1997. From perusal of the order passed by the General Manager, Sayal Area (S), Hazaribagh, it appears that he in a very sketchy manner has disposed of the appeal by reducing the punishment of dismissal from service to the punishment of stoppage of three increments, without assigning any reason whatsoever. The appellate authority has also passed the order in a mechanical manner and. therefore, I hold that the order of the appellate authority also suffers from serious infirmity and total non -application of mind.
(3.) IN view of my discussion and finding above, I allow this application and quash the order as contained in Annexure -12 passed by the disciplinary authority as well as the order as contained in Annexure -17 dated 28.1.1997 passed by the appellate authority and remit the matter back to the disciplinary authority to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after considering the show cause filed by the petitioner on 13.10.1996, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It is made clear that if the petitioner demands for a copy of the Enquiry Report which admittedly was not served on him before imposing the punishment, the same should be supplied to him immediately.;