N P KUDVA Vs. SYNDICATE BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN employee officer of the respondent-Syndicate Bank questions in this petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution, the legality or otherwise of the orders made by the disciplinary authority dated june 16, 1994 and the orders made by the appellate authority dated September 14, 1994.

(2.) BRIEF facts are: while petitioner was working as a Chief manager in Faridabad Branch of respondent-Syndic ate Bank, he was served with a charge memo dated July 15, 1987 alleging that he had committed certain acts of misconduct during the period August 1, 1983 to March 18, 1986. The charge memo had been replied and an enquiry officer had been appointed to enquire into the allegations made in that charge memo. After completion of the enquiry proceedings, the disciplinary authority of the bank had imposed a punishment by his order dated January 30, 1991 and that order has been confirmed by the appellate authority. The same has reached finality, in the sense petitioner has not questioned the decision made by the appellate authority before any other forum.

(3.) FOR the same period, namely August 1, 1983 to March 18, 1986, another charge memo dated October 1, 1991 came to be served on the petitioner. The sum and substance of the allegations in that charge memo is that, he had violated the guidelines issued by the bank in allowing the customers for over drawals etc. The allegations made in this charge memo is similar to the one which had been issued earlier and the enquiry proceedings are completed.