to G.M. at Sl. No.1 never saw the light of the day. Rather, Brij Kishore alleged on July 09, 1998 “ I submitted my complaint of this assault to the management”. Further, it is settled that no inquiry or investigation much less framing of definite charge can be embarked upon without first of all reducing the allegation to writing. Therefore, as on December 17, 1996 Sh. G.P. Singh had nothing except his own personal knowledge of the allegation, if any, to frame the charge. Thus, at best, Sh. G.P. Singh himself was the „Complainant‟ and acted as „Disciplinary Authority‟ and framed charge citing his co-accused as MWs and appointed Enquiry Officer all by himself in gross violation of principles of natural justice. Further, Sh. G.P. Singh was so much prejudiced against the petitioner that while he gave a time up to December 31, 1996 for the petitioner to submit a written statement of his defence under para 2 of Memo of Charge, he did not wait even for a single day and initiated the process for appointment of the Enquiry Officer on December 17, 1996 itself and in fact appointed the E.O. and P.O on or before December 24, 1996 but falsely declared, vide his order dated January 07, 1997 and January 04, 1997, as if appointed after receipt of the written statement on January 04, 1997 which also vitiates the initiation of the proceedings by prejudice. Therefore, initiation of action vide order of suspension dated February 14, 1996, Memo of Charge dated December 17, 1996, Order appointing Enquiry Officer dated January 04, 1997, another W.P.(C) No. 4673/2002 Page 47 of
