- (1.) ORDER of demotion was challenged before the Governor, who is the appellate authority. Even though the appeal was pending, the petitioner -appellant chose to file writ petition challenging the said order on the ground that the principle of Natural Justice had not been followed. The learned Single Judge looked into the matter and found that proper opportunity was not given to the petitioner by furnishing the relevant papers and remitted the matter to the authority concerned by setting aside the order of demotion.
(2.) NOW the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the proceeding was initiated in the year 1999. concluded in 2000 and the final order passed in 2006 and as such, the delay would make the entire proceeding vitiated. Mr. Jhunjhunwala, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, would strenuously contend that the delay, if at all occurred, was due to the laches of the petitioner and there are no laches on the part of the respondents. On going through the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, we do not find any ground to hold that the order is wrong and on the other hand, we find that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is in favour of the petitioner -appellant, directing the authorities concerned to furnish the copies of the relevant documents, if prayed for, and conduct a fresh enquiry by giving opportunity of hearing. It is also noticed from the impugned order that when the counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted before the learned Single Judge that the petitioner has not been paid arrear and current salary on account of non - preparation of the last pay certificate and non -fixation of pay scale, the learned Single Judge directed the respondent No. 2 to look into the matter and pass appropriate order.
(3.) UNDER those circumstances, we find that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is perfectly justified and there is no ground for interference with the same. This appeal is accordingly dismissed.;