Mr. Justice Bishan Narain who heard the application issued the writ prayed for, because, in his view, the order of termination of employment was in the nature of an order of punishment and an the provisions of Art.
In appeal under the Letters Patent, the order was reversed by, a Division Bench of the High Court.
The petition was transferred to the High Court of Punjab on the reorganization of the State of Punjab.
The Deputy Commissioner by order dated March 17, 1955 ordered that the services of Madan Gopal Inspector be terminated forthwith and that in lieu of numberice be will get one months pay as required by the Rules.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated October 28, 1958, of the Punjab High Court in L. P. A. No.
Having failed to obtain relief, the appellant applied to to the High Court of Pepsu for a writ under Art.
226 of the Constitution quashing the order dated March 17, 1965 on theground inter alia that the order of dismissal from service was in companytravention of Art.
Deputy Commis sioner or the Settlement Commissioner, the order was invalid.
cause against the order of dismissal was at all given.
311 2 had number been companyplied with by the Enquiry Officer, the.
The appellant requested the Deputy Commissioner to review the order, and also submitted a memorial to the Minister for Revenue affairs.
329 of 1960.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
311 of the Constitution as numberreasonable opportunity to show .
He also challenged the authority of the Settlement Officer to hold the enquiry and submitted that the procedure followed by that Officer in making the enquiry was irregular.
The appointment was ,on temporary basis and terminable with one Months numberice.
On February 5, 1955, the appellant was served with a charge sheet by the Settlement Officer, Bhatinda that he the appellant had received Rs.
The appellant submitted his explanation to the charge sheet.
August 27.
The appellant was called upon to show cause why disciplinary action should number be taken against him if the allegations in the charge sheet were proved.
delivered by SHAH, J. The appellant Madan Gopal was appointed an Inspector of Consolidation by order dated October 5, 1953 of the Settlement Commissioner of the Patiala and East Punjab States Union.
The Judgment of the Court was.
72 of 1958.
30/ as illegal gratification from one Ude Singh.
On February 22, 1955, the Settlement Officer submitted his report to the Deputy Commissioner Bhatinda, that the chage relating to recept of illegal gratification from Darbara Singh was proved.
150/ as illegal gratification from one Darbara Singh and bad demanded Rs.
N. Keswani, for the appellant.
S. Bindra and P. D. Menon, for the respondents.
