STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. LALHMACHHUANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment and order dated 4.5.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge of this court in WP ( C) No. 49 of 2008 is under challenge in this appeal.

(2.) BY this impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge has set aside the order dated 11.7.2007 passed by the appointing authority, i.e. General Manager, Network-I, SBI, whereby the delinquent/respondent was dismissed from service. Being aggrieved with the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge, the disciplinary/appointing authority has preferred this appeal.

(3.) THE charges were denied by the delinquent in toto by way of submitting his show cause reply. THEreafter, an enquiry officer was appointed and a regular domestic enquiry was conducted. During the enquiry only two witnesses were examined by the department, out of the four witnesses proposed to be examined. After the enquiry the report was submitted on 6.2.2007. As per the enquiry report only charge No. 1 was partially proved; charge Nos. 4 and 5 proved; whereas charge Nos. 2 and 3 could not be established. However, the disciplinary authority did not completely agree to the enquiry report and took a different view that charge No.1 and 2 stood proved. THE decision of the disciplinary authority was communicated to the delinquent without affording any opportunity of hearing before upsetting the enquiry officer's report. On the basis of disciplinary authority's new findings the delinquent was dismissed from service by the appointing authority.