SHARDA DEVI Vs. BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present application has been preferred for review of order and judgment dated 26.8.98 passed in L.P.A.No. 749 of 1998 affirming the order of the writ Court dated 17th April, 1998 in C.W.J.C.No. 1217 of 1996 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner had been dismissed.

(2.) CONTENTION of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the writ Court while dismissing C.W.J.C.No. 1217 of 1996 failed to consider the fact that the disciplinary authority had applied its mind to the enquiry report without serving a copy of the same on the petitioner and had differed with the Enquiring Officer and come to his own findings holding the petitioner guilty on those charges also, behind the back of the petitioner. As such, there was violation of the principle of natural justice as the disciplinary authority had passed the order behind the back of the petitioner.

(3.) BY the order under review dated 26.8.98 passed in L.P.A.No. 749 of 1998 the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that once the disciplinary authority did not agree with the report of the Enquiry Officer the whole case reopens from the very inception of the enquiry and a fresh enquiry (De novo) is required to be conducted and as the same had not been followed the L.P.A. Court erred in dismissing the appeal upholding the order of the writ Court relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Rajasthan vs. M. G. Saxena reported in (1998) 3 S.C.C.385 wherein it was held that De novo enquiry was not needed if the disciplinary authority disagrees with the enquiry report.