- (1.) THE present writ petition has been preferred for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 18th February, 1989, issued by respondent no. 1, dismissing the petitioner from service and for realization of a sum of RS.1 0,637/ - in one lump sum from the petitioner.
(2.) THE facts, in brief, as stated by the petitioner, are set out as under: - The petitioner while posted as Chief Instructor, I.T.I., Gua, was served with a memo dated 29th July, 1987 vide which he was put under suspension and, thereafter, a charge -sheet was issued memo no. 2489 dated 3rd September, 1987 directing him to submit his show cause to the enquiry officer. The charges against the petitioner were of committing fraud and forgery, causing losses to the respondents and also for preparing false and forged records. It was also pointed out that the petitioner himself vide letters/applications dated 14th June, 1984 and 14th July, 1987 accepted that he committed forgery for his personal gain. The petitioner, filed his show cause on 26th November, 1987 before the enquiry officer and, thereafter, the witnesses were examined from 14th December, 1987 to 18th December, 1987 and also filed several documents, which were marked as Annexures -7 to 10. According to him, he gave several letters and complaints and also sought" for certain documents but no action was taken. Finally based on enquiry report, the services of the 'petitioner was dismissed vide the impugned order dated 18th February, 1989 under the signature of Director, Employment and Training, Government of Bihar (respondent no. 3). Aggrieved with the same, the petitioner filed an appeal on 10th April, 1989 before the Secretary, Labour Employment and Training Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, which is still pending for disposal. The petitioner has raised the following grounds to maintain the writ petition and to set aside the impugned order. According to him, he was not supplied the copy of enquiry report and, thus, the principles of natural justice were violated and the order was not commensurate to the guilt.
(3.) THE respondents, in their counter affidavit, have stated that the principles of natural justice were complied with and the petitioner was instructed to contact personally to the In -charge, who will make available the documents as desired. It has also been stated that most of the documents did not relate to him and not relevant for the purposes of disciplinary enquiry. It was also stated that the petitioner himself twice gave in writing that he accepted his guilt to the conducting officer in the departmental proceeding and it was in these background that no show cause notice was given to him. It has also been stated that it was a case of fraud and forgery and the petitioner was found guilty of misappropriation and, accordingly, he was dismissed from service even though he had attained superannuation. It has been specifically denied that the petitioner made any request for enquiry report.;