The respondents service was terminated by an order dated April 21,1986 after an enquiry into the charges leveled against him.
By the impugned judgment the High Court has set aside the order terminating the respondents service and directed his reinstatement in service with all companysequential benefits.
The High Court has allowed the respondents writ petition for two reasons.
This view was taken on the basis of the decision of this Court in Union of India v. Mohd.
The first reason given by the High Court is that the failure to furnish the respondent with a companyy of the enquiry report vitiated the ultimate order of termination.
The respondent challenged that order by a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court.
This judgment has been challenged by special leave.
Leave granted.
Heard on merits.
The first reason given by the High Court based on the decision in Mohd.
