Kambli 1 wp2674.92 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2674 OF 1992 ... Kanneth Balakrishnan Nair ..Petitioner v/s. Indian Institute of Technology & ors. ..Respondents ... Mr.K.S.Bapat for the petitioner. Mr.P.M.Patel for the Respondents. ... CORAM: D.K.Deshmukh & N.D.Deshpande,JJ DATED: 21st September, 2010 P.C.: 1. By this petition the Petitioner, who in the employment of the Respondent, holding the post of Office Superintendent(stores) challenges the order passed by his employer Kambli 2 wp2674.92 removing him from service and directing recovery of Rs.37,953.46. This punishment of removal and recovery was ordered after finding the Petitioner guilty for the misconduct alleged against him. 2. The challenge to the punishment imposed is that the inquiry, as a consequence of which this punishment was imposed, was held contrary to the principles of natural justice. After the charge sheet was served on the Petitioner, the Petitioner submitted his reply. The Petitioner denied the charges. The Presenting officer was appointed and during the inquiry on behalf of the employer no witness was examined. Even the documents which were produced were not proved. The only method that was adopted for holding departmental inquiry was questioning the delinquent. There is no other evidence Kambli 3 wp2674.92 admittedly on record. 3. We have heard the learned Counsel for both sides. We have also gone through the record. The Petitioner has produced proceedings of inquiry on record. The Petitioner has in categorical terms stated in the petition that the Presenting Officer did not examine any witnesses to substantiate the charges. The inquiry was made, questions were put to the delinquent and the answers given by him were recorded. The delinquent was held guilty of the charges levelled against him on the basis of answers given by him to the Presenting Officer. To say the least, this procedure cannot be said to be in consonance with the principles of natural justice and thus, we find that the domestic inquiry held against the Petitioner was contrary to the principles of natural justice. After having Kambli 4 wp2674.92 found that the inquiry has been held contrary to the principles of natural justice, normally we have to set aside the order of punishment and grant an opportunity to the Management to initiate fresh inquiry. But in this case we do not propose to grant liberty to hold fresh inquiry considering the peculiar fact of the case. Admittedly the inquiry was ordered when the Petitioner was on the verge of retirement and presently he old of 80 years of age and therefore, in our opinion, it will not be appropriate to grant liberty to the Respondent to hold fresh inquiry. 4. In the result, therefore, the petition succeeds and is allowed. Rule made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). The Respondent is directed to release the payment to which the Petitioner would be entitled because of this order as Kambli 5 wp2674.92 expeditiously as possible. In any case within a period of eight weeks from today. (D.K.Deshmukh, J.) (N.D.Deshpande, J.)