BIJAY RAJKHOWA Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the enquiry report cum findings dated 10th September, 1999, submitted by the Enquiry Officer after full length enquiry in which the petitioner had participated and also he was available with all the opportunities for defending his case, Order dated 30. 11. 99 passed by the Asstt. General Manager, Region-I (Disciplinary Authority), Order dated 28. 1. 2000 passed by the Assistant General Manager (Appointing Authority) for imposing the penalty of dismissal from service to the petitioner, Order dated 18. 7. 2000 passed by the Deputy General Manager (Appellate Authority) for dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 28. 1. 2000 for dismissing the petitioner from service and also for a direction to the respondents to re-instate the petitioner in his service along with all the consequential benefits from 30. 11. 99.

(2.) HEARD Mr. M. K. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A. Borkotoki, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also heard Mr. S. S. Sharma, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. N. Barua, learned counsel for the respondents.

(3.) THE succinct fact of the petitioner's case is that the petitioner was an employee of the State Bank of India before he was dismissed from service. While the petitioner was serving as an Assistant (Cash and Accounts), by a memorandum dated 19. 5. 99 the petitioner was asked to submit his show cause why the disciplinary proceeding should not be initiated against him for the charges which reads as follows :