PRASANTA KUMAR GANGULI Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the Annexure-6 order dated March 15,2005 passed by his appointing authority dismissing him from service. The petitioner has also challenged the Annexure-8 order dated September 30, 2005, by which the appeal preferred by him against the order of dismissal, has been dismissed. The impugned order of dismissal from service was passed pursuant to the departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner on the following charges:

(2.) IN the departmental proceeding, the petitioner duly participated through his defence counsel and on conclusion of the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted his report holding that all the aforementioned charges had been proved. Copy of the enquiry report was forwarded to the petitioner on November 30, 2004 asking him to submit written representation against the same, if any. Be it stated here that during the pendency of the departmental proceeding, the petitioner was placed under suspension by order dated September 30, 2003.

(3.) THE whole basis of challenge to the impugned orders, as has been projected in the writ petition is that the petitioner alone was not responsible in respect of the transaction, for which he had been made liable. In paragraph 16 of the writ petition, the petitioner has stated about the details of the procedure to be followed in respect of such transaction. According to the petitioner, such a detailed procedure being involved in the transaction, the allegation made against the petitioner is not tenable.