(1.) This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 15.9.2006 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (C) No. 103(SH)/2002 dismissing the writ petition of the appellant against the imposition of penalty of reduction by one stage in the time scale of pay for one year, for the proved misconduct.
(2.) The appellant was employed in the respondent-Bank in the year 1977. In the year 1999, disciplinary proceedings were drawn up against him on the allegation of staying at a place outside from duty in violation of the rules, questioning the authority of the superior officer in taking administrative decision by writing letter dated 25.5.1999; Instigating the staff to Indiscipline and insubordination; not implementing the principle of "No work no pay" against the employees who participated In the strike; not issuing office order for monthly balance of Books etc.; sanctioning of loan without following the due procedure. Accordingly, charged were framed. The appellant denied the charges. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report which was in favour of the appellant, but the disciplinary authority vide letter dated 6.4.2001 issued a notice to the appellant of disagreement with the findings of the Enquiry Officer. The disciplinary authority finally held that Charge Nos. 1 & 5 were partially proved, charge Nos 2, 3 and 7 were proved and Charge Nos 4 and 6 were not proved.
(3.) The appellant, being aggrieved by the order of the disciplinary authority filed a writ petition before this Court on the plea that the Zonal Manager was not the competent authority to initiate disciplinary proceedings and that the findings of the disciplinary authority were based on no evidence. It was also submitted that the other members of the staff wore also involved In the protest and Joined the appellant in writing the letter dated 25.5.1999 on the basis of which the allegation of Indiscipline was made and thus the appellant alone could not be treated in a discriminatory manner.