( 1 ) THE petitioner questions the order of her removal from service consequent upon a disciplinary enquiry.

( 2 ) THE petitioner was serving as a Private Secretary in the Engineers India Limited (hereinafter REFERRED TO as respondent company for the sake of convenience ). It is a public sector undertaking of the Government of India. Petitioner joined as a typist in December 1965 in the pay scale of Rs. 130- 300. She was promoted as a steno- typist in September 1970 and was further promoted as a stenographer in January 1973. In January 1982 she was promoted as a Private Secretary. According to the petitioner on 19. 5. 1989 she went to see a friend, Mrs. Kapahi in the Administrative Wing of the company and at that time she was manhandled and insulted by one M. M. Lal, who was the Deputy General Manager (Administration), near the entrance of the 4th floor. Petitioner protested and a few representatives of the Union came to her rescue and demanded explanation from the said officer Lal. Petitioner lodged a complaint against Lal and as a counter-blast petitioner was kept under suspension by the management on 2. 6. 1989. Subsequently, she was served with a charge sheet and an enquiry was held. The petitioner sought the assistance of co-workers who were mainly the office-bearers of the Union but none came forward to help her in the enquiry. In the circumstances the petitioner sought permission to take the assistance of an outsider, which was refused. On the basis of the material collected at the domestic enquiry wherein several witnesses were examined by the management, a finding was given against the petitioner that she was responsible for a riotous behaviour and other charges. Petitioner filed an appeal to the first respondent without any success.

( 3 ) ACCORDING to the respondents, petitioner lodged a false complaint against Lal and actually it was the petitioner who instigated others leading to a riotous behaviour and therefore, disciplinary action was taken against the petitioner.

( 4 ) THE substance of the charges against the petitioner can be summarised thus: On 19. 5. 1989 at about 2. 40 P. M. petitioner was going away from the seat of Smt. Adarsh Kapahi, who was a Junior Assistant Grade I in the Administration Department Lal noticed the presence of the petitioner on the 4th floor hall in his department and asked the petitioner the purpose of her visit/presence in the Administration Department. Instead of answering the question petitioner challenged the authority of Lal to make such enquiry. Lal told her that he wanted to ascertain the purpose of her visit to the Administration Department and thereafter he proceeded towards the seat of one R. B. Kapoor, Manager (Administration ). After a short-while the petitioner Followed On Lal and started shouting and misbehaved with him, and used derogatory and indecent language, hurled insults and disrupted the office work. The further incidence could be conveniently narrated in the words stated in the charge-sheet served on the petitioner which reads thus:

"around 4. 30 P. M. on the same day, you went to the office of Sh. M. M. Lal and joined Sh. R. C. Naithani, Sh. Rakesh Rohtagi,shri S. P. Khurana,sh. K. P. Singh who were already present there. You started making baseless accusation against Shri Lal, shouting and using insulting and derogatory language and demanded unqualified apology from him for his alleged misbehaviour towards you. You persisted with unruly behaviour, insulted and threatened Sh. Lal and disrupted normal working of the office till 5. 10 P. M. When Shri Lal left the office you incited other employees present there to accompany you to Shri Lal s residence to insult him in the presence of his family members/neighbours. Again around 5. 15 P. M. on the same day when Shri Lal was leaving the Company premises accompanying Shri R. C. P. Chaudhary, General Manager (Engg.) in his car, you along with some other employees stopped the car. You again used