J SRINIVASA RAO Vs. UCO BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THREE important questions arise for consideration in this writ petition; viz; a) whether it is obligatory on the part of the enquiry officer in departmental proceedings, to base his conclusions upon the discussion with reference to the oral and documentary evidence adduced before him; b) whether it is permissible in law for the disciplinary authority, to impose separate punishments for individual charges; and c) whether the appellate authority can impose more severe punishment on an employee, without issuing notice, indicating his mind and proposal.

(2.) THE facts that have given rise to filing of the writ petition are, in brief, as under. The petitioner was appointed initially as a Clerk in the respondent Bank on 22. 11. 1978. Thereafter, he was promoted to the cadres of JMG grades I and II. In the year 2002, he worked as Assistant Manager at rajahmundry Branch of the bank, and was designated as Recovery Officer.

(3.) THE bank introduced a scheme "uco Mega Cash Loans" and the petitioner was entrusted with the duty of assisting the branch manager, to process loan applications, under the Scheme. He states that out of several applications received by the branch, two applications viz; those of Sri K. Mohan Babu and Sri p. Narasimha Murthy, were assigned to him for verification, and rest verified by the Branch Manager and others.