DWARKADAS S/O HUKUMCHAND BHUTADA Vs. CHAIRMAN, NANDED DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD, NANDED DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present Writ Petition, challenge is to the judgment and order passed by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Jalna in Appeal (B.I.R.) No. 7/1994 on 19.6.1996, thereby quashing and setting aside the judgment and order passed by Labour Court, Aurangabad on 7.11.1989 and restoring the dismissal order dated 8/1/1985, passed by respondent No. 1/2, dismissing the petitioner herein from service. The factual conspectus and shorn of details are as follows:

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as a Clerk in the office of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 vide order dated 27.4.1967 and his services were confirmed w.e.f. 1.7.1969. In February 1982, the petitioner was promoted as a Cashier. Thereafter in July 1984, the petitioner was promoted as an Agent. It is alleged that the petitioner has used and issued bogus triplicate advices to the customers to use money to the tune of Rs. 14,455/ temporarily. Hence, the petitioner was put under the suspension on 20.10.1984 on the ground of enquiry. During suspension, charge sheet was issued to the petitioner on 13/15.11.1984 and charge of misappropriation and misconduct was levelled against the petitioner herein under Clause (d) of Rule 16 of Certified Standing Orders of the respondents. The enquiry was conducted, statements of witnesses of both the sides were recorded. It is the contention of the petitioner that, on the promise that no action would be taken, he gave a writing of admission dated 23.11.1984 on the advice of Mr. V.R. Soni, Chief Officer (Administration), N.M. Aundhekar, Chief Officer (Accounts) and M.R. Adkine (Manager) and also considering the larger interest of the Bank and thereby stated that though the amount was obtained by him from the Bank, it was deposited and he was ready and willing to deposit the interest for the use of the amount, and requested that lenient view be taken in respect of the alleged misappropriation. Thereafter the petitioner herein received the dismissal order on 8.1.1985 along with the findings of the Enquiry Officer, dismissing him w.e.f. 9.1.1985. After receipt of the dismissal order dated 8.1.1985, the petitioner gave notice of change to respondents on 18.1.1985 and thereby desired change specified in the annexures annexed to the said notice. On 2.2.1985, the respondents informed to the petitioner that the act of misconduct of the petitioner was serious and detrimental to the interest of the institution and, therefore, could not give any lesser punishment than awarded to him.

(3.) Hence, on 20.9.1985, the petitioner filed B.I.R. Application No. 10/1985 in Labour Court, Aurangabad for quashing the order of dismissal dated 8.1.1985 and for directions to the respondents to reinstate him in the service with full back wages and continuity of service. The respondents filed their written statement therein on 14.10.1985 and opposed the said application. By judgment and order dated 7.11.1989, the learned Labour Court, Aurangabad allowed the said application and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner/applicant with continuity of service and back wages w.e.f 8.11.1985.