RAMPURE SURIRAO GYANOJIRAO Vs. CHIEF MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the order dtd. 30/12/2011 (Annexure-H) passed by the second respondent and the order dtd. 24/5/2012 (Annexure-K) passed by the Appellate Authority, dismissing the petitioner from the service.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner, that the petitioner was appointed as Clerk with the respondent-Bank on 30/1/1978 and thereafter, he was promoted as Field Officer during July, 1982. Later, the petitioner was promoted as a Manager with Scale-I in the year 1983. Thereafter, during 1998, he was promoted as Scale-II Manager and was working sincerely with the respondent-Bank at Somalapur Branch. It is the case of the petitioner that an allegation was made against the petitioner regarding shortage of paddy bags stored in the private go-downs of the various borrowers in villages and camps. It is stated that the borrowers have availed loan from the respondent-Bank by pledging paddy bags. The Officers of the respondent-Bank, conducted stock verification between 16/6/2010 and 23/6/2010 and found shortage of paddy bags as per Annexure-A to the writ petition and as such, issued notice to the petitioner to furnish details of account relating to release of loan in favour of the borrowers as well as missing of number of paddy bags in go- downs. Petitioner replied to the same as per Annexure-C. Having not satisfied with the reply made by the petitioner, the respondent-Bank initiated departmental enquiry against the petitioner and as such, issued letter dtd. 10/8/2010 (Annexure-D) placing the petitioner under suspension pending enquiry. Charge sheet was issued by the respondent-Bank as per Annexure-F in terms of Regulation No.38(1) of Pragathi Grameena Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2005. Petitioner made reply to the charge sheet as per Annexure-G. The respondent-Bank conducted enquiry and by Order dtd. 30/7/2011 (Annexure-H), dismissed the petitioner from service. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed appeal (Annexure-J) before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority, by order dtd. 8/6/2012, considered the material on record and dismissed the appeal. Feeling aggrieved by the same, petitioner has approached this Court in the present writ petition.

(3.) Heard Sri Jagdish Patil, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Harash Desai, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.