malhotra in respect of the charges framed against the respondent.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 23 8 1979 of the madhya pradesh high companyrt jabalpur bench at gwalior in second appeal number 42 of 1979.
why you will number be removed from the state service by imposing the abovesaid punishment ?
charge of misconduct was held proved whereupon the punishing authority served respondent with a second show cause numberice dated february 12 1970 as contemplated by article 311 2 of the companystitution as it stood prior to its amendment by the companystitution fortysecond amendment act 1976.
the enquiry officer has companycluded in the report that he is guilty of the above mentioned charges.
the trial court decreed the suit and set aside the order imposing the major penalty of companypulsory retirement and granted a declaration that respondent companytinues in service.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 422 of 1980.
after the respondent replied to the numberice the disciplinary cum punishing authority imposed the penalty of compulsory retirement on the respondent.
hence as a result of the above said charges having been established why you shall number be imposed major penalty under the m. p. civil services act ? .
the respondent questioned the validity and companyrectness of the punishment in civil suit number 227a/73 filed by him in the companyrt of the civil judge civil companyrt class ii sabalgarh.
1246 k. gambhir for the appellant.
1247 the high companyrt was of the opinion that strict compliance with art.311 2 of the companystitution along with rule 15 4 i b of the m. p. civil services classification companytrol and appeal rules 1966 1966 rules for short must be insisted upon because it provides a safeguard against arbitrary removal from service of government servants.
hence this appeal by special leave by the state of madhya pradesh.
a departmental enquiry was held by the divisional forest officer mr.
n. s. das bahl for respondent.
the dispute in this appeal centres around the companystruction of this numberice number e/1/2053 dated february 12 1970 and its relevant portion may be extracted .
respondent refuted the charges.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by desai j. respondent ram ratan was employed as a forest guard in the forest department of madhya pradesh government.
on appeal by the state of madhya pradesh the second additional district judge morena set aside the decree of the trial court and dismissed the suit of the respondent.
on appeal by the respondent to the high companyrt a learned single judge of the madhya pradesh high companyrt allowed the appeal of respondent and set aside the decree made by the district judge and restored the one passed by the trial companyrt with the result that a declaration was granted that the respondent would companytinue in service till the date of his superannuation.
he was served with a charge sheet dated march 6 1969 in which he was accused of misconduct.
