ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE Vs. R K UPPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two questions presented for consideration in this appeal by special leave, at the instance of the Appellants-Oriental Bank of Commerce and its General Manager - are: (one) whether in terms of Regulation 17 of Oriental Bank of Commerce Officer Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1982 (for short, the 1982 Regulations), the appellate authority is required to accord personal hearing to the Respondent in a departmental appeal; and (two) whether the order dated June 4, 2004 passed by the appellate authority in the appeal preferred by the Respondent under regulation 17 suffers from infirmity for want of reasons.

(2.) The brief facts leading to the above questions are these: the Respondent-R.K. Uppal (hereinafter referred to as delinquent) faced departmental inquiry under regulation 6 of the 1982 Regulations for acts of omission and commission committed by him while working as Senior Manager/Incumbent In-charge at 19-D, Chandigarh Branch. The article of charges served on the delinquent contained four charges, namely: (I) between the period September 14, 1999 to December 20, 1999, while recommending sanction of credit facilities and further enhancements in the account of M/s. Dunroll Industries Limited, the delinquent failed to ensure that the proposal has been properly appraised/processed and all the relevant information has been recorded in the process note; (II) the delinquent recommended release of working capital facilities aggregating to Rs. 64 lac in the account of M/s. Dunroll Industries Limited for the unit located at Sikandarabad (UP) at a distance of approximately 300 k.m. from the branch although the monitoring of unit at such a distant place was not possible; (III) the delinquent recommended enhancement of Rs. 175 lac in the Bank Guarantee limit on November 17, 2000 in the account of M/s. Dunroll Industries Limited without ensuring satisfactory conduct of the account and without going into the details of the transactions and implications thereof and (IV) the delinquent released credit facilities in the account of M/s. Dunroll Industries Limited without complying with the terms of sanction.

(3.) On March 17, 2003, Shri M.K. Ghosh, Commissioner for Departmental Inquiries, Central Vigilance Commission, was appointed inquiring authority to inquire into the above charges levelled against the delinquent.