The second ground to quash the enquiry and the dismissal order is that in accordance with the provision in Clause 14 4 c of Industrial Employment Standing Order Central Rule, 1946, numberopportunity of hearing against the proposed penalty was granted to the respondent.
The learned single Judge set aside the impugned dismissal order dated 29.4.1999 and directed his reinstatement with all monetary dues for the period intervening the date of his removal and the date of reinstatement.
Both learned single Judge and the Division Bench of High Court set aside the order of dismissal of the respondent on the ground that there were two serious procedural infirmities in the departmental enquiry.
Without resorting to the remedy in industrial law, the respondent filed a writ petition against his dismissal in the High Court of Calcutta.
The writ appeal preferred by the employer to the Division Bench of Calcutta High Court has been dismissed and the order of learned single Judge has been maintained.
After departmental enquiry held by the employer, he was dismissed from service on 22.7.1993.
Firstly, after companyclusion of the enquiry, the report of the Enquiry Officer was number supplied to the respondent before passing order of dismissal.
