The appellant, who was working as a Junior Clerk in the Subordinate Court at Yanam Pondicherry , was dismissed from the service on companyclusion of disciplinary proceedings by the Chief Judge, Pondicherry for short Chief Judge vide order dated November 8, 2000.
The Disciplinary Authority Chief Judge , on companysideration of the report submitted by the Inquiry Officer, agreed with the findings recorded in the inquiry report and awarded to the appellant penalty of dismissal from the service.
The dismissal order dated November 8, 2000, as numbered above, was challenged by the appellant before the High Court of Madras by way of filing a Writ Petition but without any success.
After full participation by the appellant thereafter in the departmental inquiry, some of the charges were found fully proved while some were held partially proved by the Inquiry Officer.
On April 28, 1999, the appellant was issued a Charge Memo setting out therein that he was liable to be proceeded with the disciplinary action under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services Classification, Control and Appeal Rules, 1965 for short CCS Rules .
Subsequently, on his objection that he had number been provided adequate opportunity, ex parte departmental inquiry was re called and the inquiry started de numbero.
An Inquiry Officer was appointed and inquiry proceeded against the appellant.
His Writ Petition came to be dismissed on June 11, 2007.
The appellant filed his response by way of defence to the Charge Memo and Article of Charges and denied the allegations levelled against him.
As a result of which, the departmental inquiry companytinued ex parte.
The appellant, after some time, did number participate in the departmental inquiry.
The appellant challenged that order before the High Court of judicature at Madras by filing a Writ Petition.
The Article of Charges companytained ten articles.
It is from this order that the present appeal, by special leave, arises.
Along with the Charge Memo, Article of Charges was sent to the appellant.
Leave granted.
