RADHA D AGARWAL Vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Deepak Chitnis, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. M. N. Bhatkal, learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

(2.) THE petitioner was initially employed as clerk with Union Bank of India-respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as "bank") in the year 1964. She was promoted as officer in December, 1975. At the time of promotion the petitioner was working at Tardeo Branch. She was transferred to L. D. Ruparel Marg branch at the close of business on 25th August, 1983. On 5th August, 1985 she was transferred to Veer Nariman Road branch from L. D. Ruparel Marg. The petitioner was charge-sheeted of certain acts and omissions while working as an officer at Tardeo branch. The allegation against the petitioner was that an amount of Rs. 2,42,374. 35 was allowed to be fraudulently withdrawn from the accounts maintained by M/s. Kapasi Co-operative Housing Society at Tardeo Branch for the period from 1981 onwards. According to the charges, 91 cheques which were forged were passed for payment by the petitioner although the signatures of the drawer of cheques did not tally with the specimen signatures on record at the branch. After holding the enquiry, the Disciplinary Authority by order dated 31st December, 1985/9th August, 1986 imposed major penalty of reduction upon the petitioner by six stages in the time scale of pay. The said order of punishment passed by the Disciplinary Authority came to be challenged by the petitioner in appeal under the Union Bank of India Officer Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976 (for short, Bank Regulations ). The Appellate Authority by order dated 14th November, 1986 dismissed the appeal holding that penalty imposed upon the petitioner was commensurate with the misconduct committed and found guilty. The Appellate Authority was of the view that there was no reason to interfere with the order of Disciplinary Authority. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order of the Appellate Authority dated 14th November, 1986 affirming the order of the Disciplinary Authority dated 31st December, 1985/9th August, 1986.

(3.) IN response to the writ petition, the counter has been filed by the Bank. Inter alia plea of the Bank is that against the order of the Appellate Authority affirming the order of Disciplinary Authority, the petitioner filed review petition before the reviewing authority and during the pendency of review petition, the writ petition has been filed; the said reviewing authority by order dated 21st September, 1988 rejected the review petition but the said order was not challenged immediately thereafter and only in the year 2001 chamber summons was taken out seeking amendment in the writ petition proposing to challenge the order dated 21-9-1988 passed by reviewing authority but the said chamber summons has been rejected and as a result of which the order dated 21-9-1988 is not under challenge. The stand set up by the bank is that the order of the Disciplinary Authority as well as the order of Appellate Authority have merged in the order of the Reviewing Authority and the said order of Reviewing Authority being not under challenge, the petition is liable to be dismissed without going into merits. Be it noted that the counter was filed by the Bank on 25th October, 1989 along therewith copy of the order of Reviewing Authority dated 21-9-1988 was also annexed. The petitioner did not take any steps in challenging the order dated 21-9-1988 as soon as copy of the counter was served upon the petitioner. It was only in the year 2001 when the writ petition was called out for hearing that the petitioner took out Chamber Summons No. 36 of 2001 seeking leave of the Court for amendment in the writ petition by proposing to challenge the order of Reviewing Authority dated 21-9-1988. The chamber summons was dismissed on 23-4-2001 by the following order :---