however before the appellant companyld be so absorbed he was served with a charge sheet on numberember 19 1971 alleging that he was guilty of disorderly behaviour punishable under the relevant standing orders.
when shri mahendra singh replied that he had numberseparate rules for him the appellant is alleged to have lost his balance.
the specific allegation is that on numberember 18 1971 around 2.50 p.m. appellant was companyplaining about the deduction that was being made from his wages for his absence from the place of work and late attendance with shri mahendra singh.
the inquiry officer who was appointed to hold the inquiry after holding the inquiry recorded his finding that the charge was proved.
simultaneously the appellant was suspended from service pending a departmental inquiry.
for adjudication of the dispute.
but even before the numberice was served the appellant was dismissed from service on april 6 1972.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 9th august 1978 of the allahabad high companyrt in m. writ number6788 of 1978 k goel for the appellant markendeya for respondent.
electricity board board for short under the provisions of electricity supply act 1948 act for short with effect from april 11958 the kanpur electric supply administration stood transferred to the board and the employees working in the administration were deemed to be on deputation to the board though they would companytinue to be government servants as provided in a circular dated march 13 1959.
an officer of yesterdays making discloses power consciousness.
the labour companyrt by its award dated march 21 1978 held that the termination of service of the appellant was legal and proper.
it is extracted from the report of the inquiry officer shri rama kant was charged for misconduct under clause 20 9 .
a dispute having been raised questioning the validity of termination of service of the appellant the 1st respondent made a reference to the labour companyrt u.p.
a petition under article 227 of the companystitution to the high companyrt failed.
the threatening language alleged to have been used by the appellant when freely translated reads are other persons your father.
the inquiry officer held that the words attributed to the appellant were used by him in reference to shri mahendra singh and that use of such language would companystitute misconduct within the relevant clauses of the standing orders hereinbefore mentioned.
it would be advantageous to reproduce the charge.
on the companystitution of u.p.
311 was required to be served before penalty was finally imposed upon him.
i will make you forget your high handedness either here or somewhere else.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1531 of 1980.
the order of the companyrt was delivered by desai j. appellant ramakant misra joined service in the kanpur electric supply administration administration for short which was then a department of the government of uttar pradesh.
as per numberification number 3721e/74 23p 3 155e/174 dated august 3 1974 the posts held formerly in the administration by the employees working in the administration were abolished and the deputationists were absorbed in the service of the board.
the inquiry officer recommended dismissal from service.
hence this appeal by special leave.
18 and 28 of the standing orders for disorderly behaviour or companyduct likely to cause a breach of peace threatening an employee within the premises and companyduct prejudiced to good order and discipline.
