DEOKINANDAN SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave has been preferred challenging the Order passed by a Division Bench of Delhi High Court in a Letters Patent Appeal whereby the same was dismissed upholding an order passed by learned single Judge of that Court confirming the order of removal of the appellant from the service of the bank after exhausting the internal remedies.

(2.) The short facts are that the appellant joined the service in the State Bank of India in its Khura Branch in the district of Bulandshaher (U.P.) as money tester on 26-5-1964 and was duly confirmed on the said post. Thereafter, he was promoted as officer grade-II and transferred to Agra in the year 1975 and later on in the year 1977 he was shifted to Faridabad branch of the bank and posted there as Officer-in-charge of the extension counter, Sewa Samiti, which counter was to handle transactions relating to deposit accounts, outward remittance and issues and encashment of rupees travellers cheques only with one man handling. On 13-10-1980 one Shri K.C. Batra, Circle Auditor inspected the accounts of the said extension counter and found serious financial irregularities therein and reported the matter to Circle Vigilance Officer whereupon the appellant was suspended from the service of the bank when the departmental proceeding was under contemplation. Subsequently, on 21-1-1983 a chargesheet was issued against the appellant framing the following charges in the departmental proceedings:-

(3.) It appears that different officers were appointed from time to time to conduct the departmental enquiry against the appellant but ultimately the enquiry commenced before Shri R. N. Dhingra, who informed the appellant of the time and place of enquiry to be conducted and before whom list of documents to be relied upon on behalf of the bank was produced by the Presenting Officer. In the meantime, it appears one Shri B. R. Sharma Officer MMG Scale-III was appointed as conducting officer who was later on replaced by one Shri Hardit Singh, Officer SMAGS-IV before whom on 5-10-1983 the Presenting Officer filed a list of witnesses to be examined on behalf of the bank. During the course of the enquiry on 19-10-1983, PWs-1 and 2 were examined and cross-examined. On 8-11-1983, which was the next date, PWs-4 and 5 were examined by the Presenting Officer but were not cross-examined on that date on behalf of the defence. Thereafter, on 2-12-1983 PW-6 was examined and cross-examined. As PWs 4 and 5 were not cross-examined, 28-12-1983 and 14-2-1984 were fixed as dates respectively for their cross-examination but they were not cross-examined on those two dates by the defence, ultimately these two witnesses could be cross-examined on 20-3-1984 on which date list of witnesses was also furnished for the first time by the defence for their examination and 11-4-1984 and 12-4-1984 were the dates fixed for their examination. On 11-4-1984 neither the defence representative attended the enquiry proceeding nor the appellant produced any defence witness, rather he filed petition for adjournment upon which the enquiry was adjourned to 12-4-1984. On 12-4-1984 certain documents were produced on behalf of the defence but neither the defence representative appeared nor a single witness was produced on behalf of the appellant and, therefore, the conducting officer decided to conclude the enquiry, which was initiated in the year 1981, and not to postpone the same further and submitted his report dated 22nd June, 1984. In his enquiry report the conducting officer, after detailed consideration, found that charge Nos. 2 3, 5 and 7 were proved whereas charge No. 1 was partially proved and in relation to charge No. 4 the conducting officer did not give any specific finding, but charge No. 6 according to the conducting officer could not be proved.