The disciplinary proceedings were initiated, inter alia, on companyplaints made by two Advocates, namely, V.K.Tiwari and Rajiv Kumar Singh.
In four cases the charges are held to be partly proved.
Certain disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the appellant.
In two other cases, according to the Enquiry Officer, bail ought to have been granted on the very first application, but it was granted on the second application.
The Enquiry Officer, however, found that in 7 cases, orders of bail were properly granted and the charges were number proved to that extent.
A writ petition was filed by him in the High Court on the grounds, inter alia, that The charges leveled against him do number companystitute misconduct and The findings recorded in the inquiry are based on companyjectures and surmises and number on facts.
The parties companycerned had number made any companyplaint in any one of the cases.
The Enquiry Officer took numbere of each one of the cases before him and re examined whether bail should have been granted in each one of those cases or number.
In one case, the appellant himself had recalled the order of bail after about 1 1/2 months of the grant of bail on an application made by the companyplainant on the ground that the bail was obtained by fraud and misrepresentation.
After inquiry, he was held guilty of the charges and was ultimately terminated from service.
On examination of each one of the charges in relation to grant of bail, the Enquiry Officer proceeded to companysider the cases on merits.
RAJENDRA BABU, J. Leave granted This appeal is directed against the order of the High Court of Allahabad dismissing a writ petition filed by the appellant.
