ALLAHABAD BANK Vs. BISHAMBER LAL KAPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 04.01.2002 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.P. No.2550 of 1998 whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the respondent herein against denial of back wages and other perks to him for the period from 01.06.1984 to 10.05.1993 by the appellants herein on the ground that he was gainfully employed and had alternate source of income during the said period, was allowed.

(2.) This case has a chequered history. The respondent herein was employed with the appellant Bank. He was dismissed from service purported to be on the ground of falsification of accounts in respect of an amount of Rs.72,449.10 by an order dated 01.06.1984. He deposited the said amount without prejudice to his rights and contentions in the inquiry, which was to b.e held against him. The appellant Bank treated the said purported deposit to be an admission of guilt on his part and dismissed him from service. Aggrieved by the said order of dismissal, the respondent preferred an appeal before the appellate authority, which was also dismissed. He, thereafter,filed a writ petition questioning the said order, which was registered as C.W.P. No.2513 of 1984. By a judgment and order dated 21.02.1992 a fresh disciplinary inquiry was directed to be held upon giving full opportunity to the respondent herein to present his case in the said proceedings. Provisionally the said order of dismissal was maintained pending the fresh departmental proceedings. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent herein filed a Letters Patent Appeal, which was registered as LPA No.33 of 1992. During pendency of the said LPA, fresh departmental proceedings were held and fresh order of dismissal from service was passed on 09.11.1995. The aforementioned LPA came up for hearing on 09.11.1995 and the Division Bench of this Court was pleased to set aside the order of dismissal against the respondent herein and directed his reinstatement subject to his challenging the fresh order of dismissal. It was held:-

(3.) A Special Leave Petition, filed before the Supreme Court by the appellant Bank thereagainst, was dismissed by an order dated 22.01.1996. However, time for concluding the inquiry was extended by six months from the date of the order.