SUBHASH CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA Vs. SYNDICATE BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is an employee of the Syndicate Bank. Certain charges were levelled against him, and after enquiry, by an order dated 17.3.2001 passed by the disciplinary authority (respondent No. 3) the punishment of dismissal from service was imposed on the petitioner. THE appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed on 5.7.2001 by the appellate authority, respondent No. 2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, this writ petition has been filed. A further prayer has been made that the petitioner be reinstated in service with full benefits of continuity of service, arrears of salary, promotion etc.

(2.) I have heard Sri Satish Chaturvedi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Sri P. K. Singhal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Bank and have perused the record.

(3.) ON receipt of the charge-sheet dated 2.6.2000, the petitioner submitted his reply on 23.6.2000. ON 26.8.2000 an Enquiry Officer was appointed to conduct the departmental enquiry. In the enquiry proceedings, two witnesses were examined by the bank, namely, K. A. Sitaram (M.W. 1) who was the Vigilance Officer of the Bank who had made vigilance enquiries ; and M. P. Vishwanathan (M.W. 2) who had assisted the Vigilance Officer during such enquiry. The petitioner examined himself as the sole witness (W.W. 1). Thereafter, the enquiry report was submitted on 25.1.2001, wherein it was concluded that the charge of 'gross misconduct of doing acts prejudicial to the interest of the Bank' as per Clause 19.5 (J) of the Bipartite Settlement was found established and proved. ON the basis of the enquiry report, vide notice dated 7.3.2001, the disciplinary authority proposed to award punishment of 'dismissal from services of the bank with immediate effect.' The petitioner submitted his reply and was provided personal hearing on 16.3.2001 and thereafter on 17.3.2001, the punishment order of 'dismissal from service' was passed by the disciplinary authority. The appeal filed by the petitioner on 12.4.2001 has also been dismissed vide order dated 5.7.2001.