- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4383 OF 2003 Subhash Amratrao Dhone. ...Petitioner VS. 1.Director, Marketing, Bharat Petroleum Corpn.Ltd. and another. . ...Respondents --- Mr.C.M.Jha, for Petitioner. Mr.S.R.Page, for Respondents. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & V.M.KANADE, JJ. V.M.KANADE, JJ. V.M.KANADE, JJ. DATED: 27th February,2008. DATED: 27th February,2008. DATED: 27th February,2008. P.C. P.C. P.C.: 1. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Chairman and Managing Director of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.. The challenge is that the order imposing punishment on the petitioner as a disciplinary authority was passed by Mr.S.Behuria who was Director (Marketing) and therefore, the disciplinary authority of the petitioner. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the order of the disciplinary authority imposing punishment. That appeal was placed before - 2 - the Chairman for decision. But by the time appeal came to be decided the same officer Mr.S.Behuria had become the Chairman and Managing Director of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Therefore, the appeal is also decided by the same officer who had passed the order imposing punishment. It is obvious that the order passed by the Chairman and Managing Director on the appeal is in violation of principles of natural justice because the same officer who had made the principal order has also made the appellate order. The learned Counsel appearing for Corporation pointed out to us that if the Chairman cannot hear the appeal, the only superior authority is Board of Directors, but the Chairman and Managing Director is also a member of Board of Directors. The learned Counsel appearing for petitioner, however, states that he has no objection for his appeal being considered by the Board of Directors though the Chairman and Managing Director is also a member of Board of Directors. He further states that if the decision of the Board of Directors goes against him, he will not challenge that decision on the ground that Mr.S.Behuria who had passed the order as disciplinary authority was a member of Board of Directors. In view of this statement, in our - 3 - opinion, the following order would meet the ends of justice:- . The order dated 11.12.2002 passed by the Chairman & Managing Director of the Corporation on the appeal of the petitioner is set aside. . The Corporation is directed to place appeal of the petitioner before the Board of Directors for consideration. The Board of Directors shall consider the appeal as appellate authority and shall pass order thereon in accordance with law. . Considering that the order imposing punishment has been passed in the year 2002, the Board of Directors shall consider the appeal as expeditiously as possible, in any case, within a period of four weeks from today. . Rule is made absolute accordingly. . No order as to costs. (D.K.Deshmukh, J.) - 4 - (V.M.Kanade, J.) ---