DEVANAND Vs. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally with the consent of the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner was working as a computer operator/clerk in respondent no.1 -Bank of Maharashtra, in its Jaripatka Branch at Nagpur. The petitioner opted for voluntary retirement and was relieved from service on 12.9.2008. The petitioner was sanctioned a pension of Rs. 13,500/ - per month on his retirement. On 26.11.2012, the petitioner was informed by a communication by the Deputy General Manager (Inspection and Audit) of the Bank about serious charges levelled against him. It was alleged that during the period from 31.5.2004 to 26.5.2008, the petitioner had entered into certain financial irregularities, in which the petitioner had opened five accounts in fictitious name and deposited 46 cheques of the customers of the Bank in the said account and had thereby committed misappropriation to the tune of Rs. 96,43,599/ -. It appears that the petitioner gave a reply to the said letter on 9.12.2012 refuting the allegations. However, the respondents blocked the pension account as well as the ATM card of the petitioner without any intimation. According to the petitioner, he has not been allowed to withdraw his pension since August 2012. By a notice dated 17.1.2013, the petitioner sought restoration of ATM card as well as release of his pension, which did not evoke any favourable response. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner filed this petition initially with a prayer.

(3.) IT appears that the matter was also reported to the Police Station, Jaripatka, Nagpur on 10.11.2012, in which, apart from the petitioner, there are twelve others named who, according to the respondents -Bank, have conspired with the petitioner, in siphoning out the amount on the basis of the fictitious accounts. It further appears that an offence is registered in respect of the same and a criminal case is instituted and is pending.