1. ' MALIK MUHAMMAD PARVEZ KHAN (CHAIRMAN).--Appellant Waris Khan was dismissed from service vide impugned order dated 12-11-1987 of respondent No, 1 and his appeal to respondent No, 2 being dismissed, he has approached the Tribunal for setting aside the same on the grounds that he was in no way responsible for the receipt of illegal gratification, that no enquiry was conducted in the case and that respondents Nos. 1 and 2 who were witnesses to the occurrence acted as the judges, in derogation of the principles of natural justice, equity and good conscience. No law on the earth provides such state of affairs to act in the capacity of a prosecutor as well as a Judge.
2. ' The appeal was denied by the respondent.
3. We have gone through the record with the assistance of the learned counsel for the appellant and Special Government Pleader and have come to the conclusion that it would have been fair and impartial if the authority had appointed some Enquiry Officer to probe into the guilt of the appellant. It required definite proof of the allegations of the receipt of illegal gratification.
4. ' On the other hand the learned authority on receipt of reply to the she ,w-cause notice proceeded to announce the dismissal order. The appeal preferred by the appellant was rejected by the same officer who was accompanying the authority at the time of the alleged occurrence. We are, therefore, satisfied that the respondents 1 and 2 have not adhered to the principles of natural justice and by accepting the present appeal, we set aside the impugned orders. The appellant stands reinstated in service from the date his dismissal was announced. He is entitled to all the benefits. Parties are left to bear their own costs. File be consigned to the record room.