PRADIP KUMAR DAS Vs. R S SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This intra-court appeal impugns the judgment dated 12.09.2011 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.643/1995 preferred by the respondent No.1. The respondent No.1 was employed with the appellant Bank. He had filed the writ petition impugning the order dated 03.06.1994 of the Disciplinary Authority of the appellant Bank imposing penalty of reduction of grade from SMG Scale-IV to MMG Scale-III on the respondent and the order dated 17.06.1995 of the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the appellant Bank as the Appellate Authority, removing the respondent from service. The learned Single Judge vide the judgment impugned in this appeal, though not finding merit in the challenge to the order dated 03.06.1994 of the Disciplinary Authority imposing the penalty of reduction of grade on the respondent, has set aside the order of the Appellate Authority removing the respondent from service, for the reason of the charge on the basis whereof the penalty was enhanced to that of removal from service having not been put to the respondent and the finding of the Appellate Authority thereon being based on no evidence. The respondent having attained the age of superannuation, the learned Single Judge directed the appellant Bank to release the retiral and other benefits along with arrears to the respondent, treating the respondent to have continued in service till superannuation on the grade of MMG Scale III.

(2.) Notice of this appeal was issued and since a short issue was involved, the appeal, with the consent of the counsels set down for final hearing at the after notice miscellaneous stage only. The operation of the judgment of the learned Single Judge was also stayed. The respondent has preferred cross objections qua the findings of the learned Single Judge upholding the order of the Disciplinary Authority and which cross objections were also directed to be heard along with the appeal. The counsels have been heard.

(3.) The challenge by the respondent in the cross objections to the order of the learned Single Judge is on the ground of the inquiry purportedly held against him and on the basis whereof the Disciplinary Authority imposed the punishment of reduction of rank, being defective. It is argued that neither any admission/denial of documents was done nor was any evidence led by the appellant Bank or any of the charges proved and thus the finding that, the charges have been proved against the respondent, could not have been arrived at. It is argued that the departmental inquiry was thus vitiated. Per contra, the counsel for the appellant, from the record of the departmental proceedings has purported to show that the charge on the basis whereof the appellate authority has enhanced the punishment was framed / existed and also stood proved.