ASHOK K. NANDA Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugns the orders passed by the departmental authorities; of the disciplinary authority dated 22.9.1997 and the appellate authority dated 18.5.1998; whereby petitioner was visited with the punishment of removal from services. Most of the charges against the petitioner contained in the chargesheet dated 2.6.1992 (and which is accompanied by imputations of misconduct) have been held against the petitioner. With respect to accounts of three customers namely M/s Savik Vijay Engineering Private Limited, M/s Tajesh Minerals Enterprises and M/s Installation and Allied Services India , petitioner was found guilty in failing to ensure compliance of pre - sanction and post -sanction requirements, granting of financial facilities without having powers to do so and concealing the same from the higher authorities, failing to inform Export Credit Guarantee Corporation (ECGC) in time resulting in loosing of bank's entitlement with ECGC etc etc.

(2.) BEFORE adverting to the arguments urged on behalf of the petitioner, the scope of hearing in a petition filed before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India needs to be set out. This Court does not sit as an Appellate Court to re -apprise the findings of facts and law arrived at by the departmental authorities. Orders of the departmental authorities can only be challenged on the ground of perversity in the findings, violation of principles of natural justice, violation of rules/law and violation of doctrine of proportionality. On these principles let us examine the arguments which have been urged on behalf of the petitioner.

(3.) THE arguments which have been urged before me are basically in terms of the pleadings which are drawn up with respect to grounds I, J, K and L which run from pages 49 to 62 of the writ petition. The aforesaid grounds are with respect to the first two accounts and with respect to the third account of M/s Installation & Allied Services India. What is argued is that since the illegal purchasing of the bills were reported, petitioner stands exonerated.