ASHOK KUMAR SINGH Vs. VIJAYA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ application is directed against an order of termination of the service of the petitioner passed by the respondent no.2 under his memo No. PER:IRD:4050:2005 dated November 5, 2005. The back drop of this case in a nutshell is as under:- The petitioner participated in a selection process for appointment of Assistant General, Managers Net Working under the respondent Bank on the basis of his application dated May 3, 2003. By a communication issued under memo No.PER:HRD:RCT:6691:2003 dated December 17, 2003 the petitioner was informed by the respondent no.3 that he had been selected for appointment to the post of Assistant General Manager, Net working in SMG Scale�V with the conditions that he would be on probation for a period of one year from the date of joining the respondent bank and he would be considered for conformation in service subject to his satisfactory performance, conduct and satisfactory report from the police authorities about his character and antecedent and the petitioner would be governed by the following regulations:-

(2.) ON June 5, 2004, the petitioner joined the above service at Bangalore. After expiry of the period of one year for probation, letter of confirmation was not sent to the petitioner. By an order passed by the General Manager(Personnel), (Disciplinary Authority), under memo no. PER:IRD:BGL:212:2005 dated January 15, 2005, the petitioner was placed under suspension from the services of the respondent bank with immediate effect on an allegation of making an attempt to take away 4 box files containing highly confidential tender document relating to a 'Manageable Switch Tender ' from his office cabin at DIT, HO, unauthorisedly through his personal driver. He was advised not to enter into the premises of the respondent bank without written permission from the authority. On January 27, 2005 the petitioner preferred an appeal against the above order of suspension before the Executive Director of the respondent bank under the provisions of Regulation 17(1) of Vijaya Bank Officers Employees ' (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1981.

(3.) ACCORDING to him, he was appointed to implement and maintain the Core Banking Solution Net working throughout India to provide online service in all branches of the respondent bank. In discharging his duties, the petitioner provided specific design for purchase of several computers and related hardwares for Net working. Consequent thereupon, the respondent bank floated tender for purchasing Manageable Switch. The members of the tender committee, which included the petitioner amongst other members, considered the tender documents of three participants in its meeting dated April 2, 2004 observing that technical bids submitted by CMC Ltd. and Wipro Ltd., were in compliance with the bank 's requirement and decided to place the same before the General Manager, DIT seeking his approval for opening price bids. Ultimately, Wipro Ltd., succeeded in the tender. According to the petitioner, during the supply made by Wipro Ltd., the petitioner repeatedly asked the supplier to verify the quality of the product as per design since it was a pre-requisite in tender that a pre-delivery inspection would to be conducted prior to acceptance of the product. The Wipro Ltd. got the condition wipped out by the orders of the respondent no.5. According to the petitioner he repeatedly emphasized upon the pre-delivery inspection in the interest of the respondent bank but he was scolded by the respondent nos.5 and 6 in strong terms for restraining him from creating any hindrance in the matter. Ultimately, the Wipro Ltd. submitted test plan to the respondent no.5 directly. According to the petitioner, the respondent no.5 sent the test plain to a consultant who was not authorised for that purpose. Finally, the consultant sent his advice in favour of a test plan on January 10, 2005. The respondent no.5 sent this plan along with advise of consultant to the petitioner on January 12, 2005.