S.K.GAUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by Sh. S.K.Gaur, an employee of the Bank of India (represented by respondents no.2 to 7), and who has been imposed the punishment of dismissal from services by the departmental authorities. Petitioner impugns the enquiry officer's report dated 29.9.1995 holding charge no.2 against him and also the order of the disciplinary authority dated 16.7.1997 imposing the punishment of the dismissal from services. The order of the disciplinary authority has been upheld by the appellate authority vide order dated 21.1.1998 and which order is also impugned and also is impugned the order of the reviewing authority dated 3.9.1998. Effectively therefore the present writ petition is the fifth tier of challenge i.e after the findings of the enquiry officer, disciplinary authority, appellate authority and the reviewing authority.

(2.) The charge against the petitioner was that he illegally favoured a customer M/s Surlux Mediquip Ltd. by arranging /recommending sanction of a credit limit to the tune of approximately Rs. 80 lacs without proper introduction of the account and without sanction existing of the Letter of Credit (L/C) limit. I may note that there are three Article of Charges as per the charge-sheet dated 23.11.1994. With respect to charges in Article no.3 petitioner was exonerated and with respect to Article-1 though the same is held against the petitioner, the same is not challenged before me. Petitioner only impugns the findings with respect to Article -2. This Article-2 of the Articles of Charges reads as under:-

(3.) Before I turn to the arguments urged on behalf of the petitioner, it is necessary to state at the outset the scope of hearing of a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by which orders passed by the departmental authorities are challenged. This Court while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 does not sit as an appellate court to reappraise the findings and conclusions of the departmental authorities. This Court can interfere only if there is a perversity in the findings of the departmental authorities.