VAKIL CHAND JAIN Vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The face of this writ petition hinges on the reply to three questions, which have been posed by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, firstly as to whether the order of punishment is vitiated for the reason that the charges contained in the charge-sheet admittedly served to the petitioner, do not make out a case of dismissal inasmuch as the regulations under which the charges were framed, are invalid, secondly, that the charges are not based upon the imputation of the charges and the material sought to be adduced against the delinquent. Thirdly, that as to whether the action of the disciplinary authority while dismissing the petitioner, in spite of the fact that the petitioner was exonerated from all the charges by the Inquiry Officer, is bad for the reason that the delinquent was not given an opportunity to show cause.

(2.) With this prelude it is necessary to examine the factual matrix as set out in the petition. The petitioner, who at the relevant time, was working as Branch Manager at Court Road, Sa-haranpur, was suspended from service on the charges as under:

(3.) He failed to intimate the higher authorities about the fact that his wife Smt. Bimla Jain and son Ajay Kumar Jain have entered into a trade business as cloth merchant in the name of the firm M/s. Ajay Textile, Trishla Jain Market, Saharanpur and he thereby contravened Regulation 6(2) of Central Bank of India Officers Employees (Conduct) Regulation, 1976. 3. The petitioner submitted his explanation to the said charges. Thereafter an inquiry proceeded against the delinquent.