ORDER :

Paresh Upadhyay, J.

Heard Mr. N.M. Kapadia, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Pranav G. Desai, learned counsel for the respondent Bank.

2. Challenge is made in this petition to the final decision of the disciplinary authority of imposing major penalty of removal, on the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner by the respondent Bank. The prayer in the petition reads as under:

"... YOUR LORDSHIP be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, direction and order and further be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned inquiry and decision of the respondent to impose major penalty on the petitioner at the conclusion of the said inquiry proceedings..."

The disciplinary proceedings in question has ultimately culminated in punishment of removal of the petitioner from the service of the Bank vide order dated 01.06.1984. There is controversy with regard to service of that order as well, which is discussed in this judgment subsequently, but the punishment order dated 01.06.1984 is taken on record and the petitioner is permitted to challenge the legality and validity of the said order dated 01.06.1984 as well, along with the