1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

2. The writ petition is directed against judgment and order dated 02.12.1998 passed by State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') rejecting Claim Petition No. 526/III/90 of petitioner-Satya Prakash Singh, who has now died and substituted by his legal heirs. Petitioner challenged the order of punishment of removal dated 16.04.1990 but has failed before Tribunal.

3. Counsel for petitioner submitted that only a chargesheet was served upon petitioner which he could not reply and thereafter without holding oral enquiry whatsoever enquiry report was submitted and thereafter impugned punishment order has been passed.

4. It is contended that punishment of removal is a major punishment and therefore, could not have been passed without holding an oral enquiry.

5. Our attention has been drawn to paragraphs 2 and 3 of claim petition wherein it was pleaded that no oral enquiry was conducted and in the counter affidavit filed before Tribunal in para 3 it has not been disputed that no oral enquiry was conducted. However, it is said that petitioner has neither submitte