JAVED Vs. SYNDICATE BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard by consent of the parties.

(2.) HEARD Shri Parsodkar for the petitioner, Shri Anilkumar Advocate for respondent nos.1 and 2 and Shri S. B. Ahirkar, Advocate for respondent no.3.

(3.) THE facts relevant for adjudicating the present controversy are that the petitioner was appointed as a Probationary Officer with the respondent no.1 - Bank on 27 -9 -2008. During his course of employment with the respondent no.1 - Bank, the petitioner was selected for appointment on the post of Dy. Advisor (Banking and Foreign Trade)in the Central Bureau of Investigation. This appointment was to be on contract basis. The petitioner was informed about his aforesaid selection on 19 -4 -2011. The petitioner, therefore, on 3 -5 -2011, tendered his resignation from service to the respondent no.1. The said request for resignation was, however, rejected by respondent no.1 on the ground that investigation in an ATM fraud case was pending against the petitioner. Subsequently, the respondent no.1 - Bank held disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner in terms of its Discipline and Appeal Regulation, 1976. In these proceedings, the disciplinary authority held the petitioner guilty of misconduct and imposed penalty of reduction of two stages in the time scale of his pay with immediate effect for a period of two years. The aforesaid penalty was implemented by the Bank vide communication dated 24 -1 -2012 and on the same date, the petitioner accepted the aforesaid punishment and informed the same to the respondent no.1 - Bank. The petitioner, thereafter, on 24 -1 -2012 sought to be relieved from the services of the respondent no.1 - Bank on the ground that the disciplinary proceedings had been concluded and the punishment had been accepted by him. On 14 -3 -2012, the respondent no.1 - Bank relieved the petitioner from services. The memorandum of relieving dated 14 -3 -2012 reads as under: -