BIKASH SETHY Vs. ODISHA GRAMYA BANK AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was a Scale-II Officer of Odisha Gramya Bank, has filed this writ application to quash the order of his termination dated 18.10.2013 in Annexure-9 and consequential order of rejection of his appeal by the appellate authority dated 30.06.2016 in Annexure-10, which was passed without giving any opportunity of hearing and compliance of principles of natural justice.

(2.) The brief facts of the case in hand is that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste community. On being duly selected for the post of Officer Scale-I, on 29.09.2008 he was posted as Probationary Officer in the Oriental Bank of Commerce at Dhamtari in the State of Chhatishgarh, where he continued as an officer till 11.01.2012. After completion of probation period, as is evident from the certificate issued by Oriental Bank of Commerce dated 11.01.2012 in Annexure-1, while the petitioner was so working, he came across an advertisement issued by the Neelachal Gramya Bank, Bhubaneswar (after merger with Baitarani Gramya Bank renamed as "Odisha Gramya Bank") for filling up the post of 'Officer MMGS-II'. Being desirous to work in the State of Odisha, he applied for the said post and appeared in the written test held on 12.06.2011. On being successful in the written test, he appeared in viva voce test and was selected. Consequentially, vide order dated 12.01.2012, he was appointed as Manager in Talcher Branch in the scale of pay of Rs.19,400/-.

(3.) Mr. Asok Mohanty, learned Senior Counsel appearing along with Mr. B. Senapati, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the order of termination passed on 18.10.2013 by opposite party no.1-Chairman, Odisha Gramya Bank smacks mala fide. As such, vide letter dated 16.10.2013, opposite party no.3 had issued notice to show-cause within seven days from the date of receipt of the letter for initiation of disciplinary action against the petitioner and just after two days of issuance of the aforesaid letter, i.e., 18.10.2013, opposite party no.1-Chairman of the Bank, who claims to be the appointing authority, passed the order of termination without giving opportunity of hearing to him. It is further contended that though the petitioner was continuing as a probationer, he was granted three increments from the date of joining, i.e., 12.01.2012 till his joining at Jajpur Branch on 31.07.2013 in quick succession because of his performance. But, how he became unfit within two months of service at Jajpur Branch because he was pressurized by the Branch Manager, Jajpur Branch to do some illegalities and grant KCC loan without any no due certificate. It is further contended that the order of termination suffers from vice of mala fide and non-compliance of principles of natural justice. More particularly, the allegation of indiscipline conduct casts stigma on the career of the petitioner and termination of service, without giving opportunity of hearing, is a nullity. It is further contended that without application of mind, the appellate authority has rejected his appeal by not assigning any reason thereof. Therefore, the order of termination dated 18.10.2013 in Annexure-9 and consequential rejection of appeal on 30.06.2016 in Annexure-10 are liable to be quashed, particularly when the same have been passed while petitioner was on probation.