RANJIT SINGH, J.

1. Respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction with a prayer that while posted at Kanina, a criminal case was registered against him under Sec.409 IPC. Respondent-plaintiff was accordingly put under suspension and during the pendency of this, XEN was detailed as an Enquiry officer to enquire into the matter. Said XEN submitted a report that the respondent-plaintiff has deposited the money and he be reinstated. The Board terminated the services of the respondent-plaintiff on 11.10.1994, which, he challenged through the civil suit, alleging that this order was ante- dated and malafide. He also pleaded that the order was passed without initiating the enquiry as per the law and without recording any evidence. His grievance further is that no charge was proved against him. Subsequently, the respondent-plaintiff was also acquitted of the criminal charge, referred to above, and accordingly pleaded that order of his termination was null and void.

2. In response to notice issued, written statement was filed. It is pleaded that while being posted as L. D. C. (C), the respondent- plaintiff did not maintain the cash book correctly and misappropriated the