STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. BAKUL CHANDRA DEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) THIS appeal has been filed by the State Bank of India against the judgment of the learned Single Judge in C. R. 6162 (W) of 1979 dated 12th April, 2006.

(3.) THE petitioner had filed the writ petition challenging the validity and/or legality of the disciplinary proceedings and the order of punishment whereby he was ordered to be dismissed from service on 30th April, 1976. He had alleged that the departmental enquiry was conducted on a concocted allegation manufactured in a calculated manner by respondent No. 5, Branch Manager, to satisfy his personal vengeance. The petitioner complained that the enquiry was not conducted in accordance with the rules of natural justice and the prescribed procedure and rules of the bank. It was also stated that before the order of dismissal was passed, even a copy of the enquiry report was not supplied to him. The relevant facts which appear from the pleadings are that the petitioner was appointed as a messenger/waterman on 15* May, 1967 and posted at Siliguri Branch of the State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as 'appellant-bank' ). The service of the petitioner was made permanent with effect from 15th April, 1968. The work of respondent No. 5, Branch Manager, was severely criticized by the employees posted in the Siliguri Branch. The petitioner is one of the agitators. The Branch Manager in order to cover up his misdeeds used to victimize the honest employees. The petitioner was suspected of leading the agitators. In the fourth week of July, 1969 i. e. 25th July, 1969 the petitioner had fallen seriously ill and he was advised to take complete bed rest. The petitioner could not move out of the residence on that date. In spite of his absence on the said date he was served with the memorandum dated 28th July, 1969 wherein it was alleged that on 25th July, 1969 he had tried to commit, a fraud by presenting a letter of withdrawal purported to have been signed by sri Santosh Kumar Ganguly. The petitioner claimed that the aforesaid charge was wholly concocted. On 28th July, 1969 the petitioner was called by the manager to his chamber. He was threatened with the dire consequence of dismissal from service and torture by the police unless his confessional statement in the language and words as dictated by the Manager, is written and signed by him. The petitioner being absolutely helpless and under coercion, undue influence and compulsion wrote out a statement as dictated by respondent no. 5, Branch Manager himself. In this statement the petitioner had admitted that he had committed the misconduct. Immediately thereafter the petitioner complained to the police and a daily diary was recorded by the police. Thereafter the petitioner was chargesheeted on 30th April, 1969 and a departmental enquiry was conducted. However, according to the petitioner the enquiry was conducted in utter breach of natural justice and rules and regulation of the bank. Ultimately without giving any consideration to the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the disciplinary authority directed that the petitioner be dismissed from service by order dated 30th April, 1976. Challenging the said order the petitioner had filed the writ petition.