9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uccession of dates from Exts.P1 to P4, amounts to affording reasonable opportunity or there is violation of principles of natural justice? - HELD THAT:- This Court has difficulty in accepting the contention now vehemently put forward by the learned Government Pleader, for the petitioner at no point of time tried to procrastinate the enquiry and the one adjournment, which he is otherwise legally en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2003. The petitioner alleges to have received the notice on 21.02.2019 and the proposed enquiry was scheduled at 11.A.M. on 23.02.2019. The petitioner through Exts. P2 and P2(a) requested time for submitting the reply or participating in the enquiry. On 25.02.2019, as per Ext.P3, an e-mail was sent attaching the copy of letter made for adjournment by the petitioner. The respondents referring to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned Government Pleader tries to justify Ext.P4 by drawing a very subtle line of difference between the communication in Exts.P2 and P3 and the order made in Ext.P4 by contending that the petitioner if at all was interested in seeking time in response to Ext.P1 notice, firstly, he ought not to have waited till 22.02.2019 and secondly, the request through Ext.P2 was received in the office on 27.02 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contention now vehemently put forward by the learned Government Pleader, for the petitioner at no point of time tried to procrastinate the enquiry and the one adjournment, which he is otherwise legally entitled to is also brushed aside in haste. 6. Ext.P4 is set aside as contrary to principles of natural justice. The matter is remitted to first respondent for consideration and dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
