2.The Learned Single Judge, while passing the common order dated 11.09.2014, in W.P.Nos.482 to 484 of 2014 (filed by the 1st Respondent/Petitioners), in paragraph 13, had observed that 'Therefore, it is clear that the Petitioners in these writ petitions were not even informed of the charges that they are obliged to answer. Many of the requirements of principles of natural justice, I admit, could be dispensed with in cases of this nature. The question as to whether, who were examined as witnesses, whether full opportunity was given to cross-examine them, whether documents were produced, etc., may all stand at the fringe of the principles of natural justice. But, the most fundamental requirement, namely that of, putting the delinquents on notice, of the charges against them, can never be dispensed with.' and also, in paragraph 14, had, inter alia, observed that '... even assuming that there was a wrong mentioning of the dates, the doubt created, on the basis of wrong mentioning of the dates, cannot be cleared so easily, especially, in view of the fact that the petitioners were not even put on notice of the charges' and resultantly held that despite the fact that the allegations against the Petitioners are very serious, the ultimate conclusion cannot be approved due to the absence of the most fundamental requirement and allowed the writ petitions.
