STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. VIKRAM SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have filed this appeal against the order dated 10/11/2011 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 1096/2009 (S). The respondent employee was appointed on 10th February, 1985 in clerical cadre in the State Bank of Indore. Subsequently, the aforesaid Bank was merged with the State Bank of India. During the period with effect from 02/12/2000 to 31/8/2004, he was posted as Computer Terminal Operator in the clerical cadre at Kampoo, Gwalior. During the aforesaid period, the Branch Manager, entrusted the respondent employee the duties of, documentation, recovery notice, preparation of statement of all advances, posting of log book and ledger and all other work. While discharging the aforesaid duties, the respondent employee committed various acts of omissions and committed fraud on the Bank by distributing fake bank loans. He was suspended vide suspension order dated 03/9/2004. The Bank Authority also lodged a FIR in regard to criminal action against the respondents at Police Station, Kampoo Gwalior. On the basis of report, an offence under Section 420 and 409 of Indian Penal Code was registered against the respondent employee.

(2.) The Bank also issued a chargesheet against the respondent employee vide memo dated 06th October, 2004. By the aforesaid chargesheet, it is alleged that the respondent had opened nine forged saving bank accounts and allotted individual loans to the account holders. Due to the aforesaid conduct of the respondent, a loss to the tune of Rs. 8.20 lacks was caused to the Bank. Near about 10 charges were levelled against the respondent. It is not necessary to mention the details of the charges. It was also mentioned that earlier also for a misconduct, a punishment was imposed against the respondent. The respondent did not file reply and demanded certain copies of documents, thereafter, there was long correspondence between the respondent and Bank. The Bank vide order 11th January, 2005 informed the respondent that copies of required documents had already been supplied to the respondent and he can inspect the other documents. Then, a second chargesheet was issued to the respondent on 11th February, 2005. The Enquiry Officer was appointed and the respondent was also provided the benefit of defence assistance. The respondent requested that he be permitted to engage a counsel as defence assistance, that request was rejected. The Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry proceedings and the enquiry proceedings were completed on 22/2/2007. Before, the Enquiry Officer written statements were also filed. The Enquiry Officer found the charges Nos. 1 to 10 of chargesheet dated 06th October, 2004 and charges Nos. 1 to 6 of chargesheet dated 11th February, 2005 proved. Thereafter; a show cause notice was issued to the respondent on 07th November, 2007 along with the enquiry report. He was also given opportunity of personal hearing. He requested the time for personal hearing, that was accepted. The respondent appeared before the disciplinary authority on 29th November, 2011 and submitted oral documents. After considering the reply and enquiry report, the disciplinary authority imposed the following punishment:

(3.) Against the aforesaid order, the respondent preferred an appeal, that was dismissed. Then, he filed a writ petition before this Court. The writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge vide impugned order and he remanded the matter back for enquiry from the stage of recording of statements of management witnesses. Learned Single Judge also observed that the period from the date of suspension upto the date of completion of further enquiry shall be treated under suspension and the respondent shall be entitled subsistence allowance in accordance with law.