SHIV NATH SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was employed as Office Assistant in Kashi Gomti Sanyukt Gramin Bank, Branch Gohana, District Mau. On 25.04.2014 he was placed under suspension alongwith one Chandra Bhanu Singh, Assistant Manager, posted in the same branch. Services of petitioner were governed by Kashi Gomti Sanyukt Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010. A charge sheet was issued to petitioner on 07.11.2014 levelling following charges:

(2.) Particulars of charges were enclosed with the charge sheet, according to which, petitioner unauthorizedly withdrew a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- from saving bank account no.201400262, belonging to Lavtu Ram, on 24.01.2014 and again on 28.01.2014 a sum of Rs.1,36,789/- was transferred from his account to the account of Chandra Bhanu Singh, who was working as Assistant Manager, in his COD Account No.4020020112. This was done without knowledge and consent of account holder. After complaint of account holder Lavtu Ram the petitioner withdrew a sum of Rs.3,62,000/- from account of one Jai Karan Ram bearing no.201400188 and deposited it in the account of Lavtu Ram on 07.02.2014. It was found that in all three transactions the transfer vouchers, signatures of account holder and details varied. The account holders Lavtu Ram and Jai Karan Ram disputed their signatures on the documents used for such transfer of funds. The act of withdrawing Rs.3,62,000/- from account of Jai Karan Ram was a fraudulent transaction performed by the petitioner for causing loss to the bank and also breached the trust reposed by account holders in the bank and its authorities. It was also found that the amounts deposited in the account of Assistant Manager Chandra Bhanu Singh was diverted in his provident fund loan account. These transactions were allegedly performed by the petitioner.

(3.) The second incident/transaction was of withdrawing Rs.2,05,000/- on 04.02.2014 and Rs.27,000/- on 06.02.2014 from the accounts of Jai Prakash Yadav and Imtiyaz Ahmad and depositing it in the account of petitioner without consent and knowledge of the account holder. These transactions were absolutely fraudulent, without consent of the account holders and allegedly breached the trust imposed by the bank in the petitioner.