ANIL KUMAR Vs. G M CANARA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was initially recruited as a Clerk in Canara Bank. In the year 2003, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Junior Management Grade -I and was transferred to the Sikandrabad branch in District Bulandshahr and was In -charge of the advance and disbursement of loan to different borrowers. On 13th April, 2005, the petitioner was placed under suspension on the charge of taking a bribe.

(2.) IT transpires that a loan of Rs.79,500/ - was sanctioned to Tejveer Singh on 21st May, 2005 for the purpose of an electronic shop. The petitioner had not disbursed the loan despite several visits made by the borrower Sri Tejveer Singh for the disbursement of the loan. On 12th April, 2005, during lunch hours, the petitioner visited the shop of Tejveer Singh and accepted a bribe of Rs.2,000/ -. The said incident of accepting the bribe was videographed by the personnel of Star TV and was telecast on Star News channel on 12/13/14th April, 2005, which tarnished the image of the bank. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and, thereafter, a chargesheet dated 6th September, 2005 was issued. The charges levelled against the petitioner was: -

(3.) THE petitioner denied the charges and, accordingly, an Inquiry Officer was appointed and an inquiry was held in which the petitioner was given an opportunity to defend himself. The Inquiry Officer, after taking all the evidence and after giving full opportunity to the petitioner, submitted an inquiry report holding that the charge no.1 was not proved against the petitioner and that the charge no.2 relating to acceptance of bribe was fully proved. The Inquiry Officer concluded that even though there was a delay in the disbursement of the loan it could not be established that the petitioner was responsible for withholding the disbursement. The Inquiry Officer found that the petitioner had demanded a bribe of Rs.5,000/ - and had accepted the bribe of Rs.2,000/ - in connection with the loan. Based on the inquiry report, the Disciplinary Authority after considering all the aspects of the matter passed an order dated 22nd April, 2006 awarding a punishment of compulsory retirement.