4. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner-appellant, in course of argument, had raised only one point. She submitted that the finding guilt of the appellant in the Departmental Proceeding is based on documents, but, those documents were not proved as per law. She submits that no person was examined as a witness before the Enquiry Officer to prove those documents, thus, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Roop Singh Negi versus Punjab National Bank and Others reported in (2009) 2 SCC 570, it can be said that without any evidence, appellant has been punished. As per her, learned Single Judge has failed to take into consideration the aforesaid principle of law that the documents need to be proved and in absence of proof, the entire enquiry is vitiated. As per the counsel for the petitioner, the issue that no witnesses were examined in this case was raised by the writ petitioner-appellant and the learned Single Judge has also dealt with the said issue from paragraph 39 of the judgment, wherein the learned Single Judge has given a finding that no oral evidence has been adduced from either side and there was no formal marking of documents as exhibits. When the aforesaid finding has been arrived at by the learned Single Judge, only on the ground that both the parties have relied upon the documents cannot be a ground to bypass the settled principle of law, which has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Roop Singh Negi (supra).
