JUDGMENT :

Lapita Banerji, J.

The petitioner was an employee of the Tea Board, working in the capacity of Senior Assistant. The petitioner challenged an Order of Dismissal dated December 20, 2018 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the Order dated August 6, 2019 passed by the Appellate Authority. On December 14/20, 2016, a Memorandum of Charges/charge sheet was issued against the petitioner for alleged misconduct, primarily on 2 grounds:

(a) He was absenting himself frequently from official duty since June 1, 2016, without prior intimation and permission; and

(b) He was a habitual late comer and seldom came to the office as per the time schedule.

2. A Reply was given to the Charge sheet on December 26, 2016. In Reply, the petitioner categorically denied and disputed the Articles of charge. He stated that the Charge Sheet did not contain clear and unambiguous charges. The number of days petitioner’s late arrival to office and the number of days of his absence was not indicated therein.

3. In the said Reply, it was maintained that the petitioner’s place of posting/seating in the office was clearly under the CCTV coverage. In the event the said CCTV footage was provided on and from Ju