( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

( 2 ) FROM the record it appears that the petitioner was suspended on 19. 4. 1990 on the charge of embezzlement. An F. I. R. was also lodged against him on the same charge under Sections 409, 467, 468, 471 and 420 I. P. C. On 9. 2. 1991. The petitioner was granted bail by this Court on 6. 4. 1992. After suspension the petitioner was served with departmental charge sheet and additional charge sheet. The Enquiry Officer after receiving the reply of the petitioner submitted his report for removing him from service. The petitioner was also served with the charge sheet of the criminal case on 13. 4. 1991 in which same allegation and same charge as shown in the departmental charge sheet were given.

( 3 ) IT is alleged that the respondent has already deducted the embezzled amount from the subsistence allowance of the petitioner. It is further alleged that he could not be removed from service being a permanent employee without conducting any enquiry under Article 311 (2) of the Constitution. It is further contended that the petitioner can at the most be placed under suspension during the pendency of criminal trial but he c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document