MOHINDER KUMAR JAIN Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has been under suspension since 28.4.1977 and has claimed the relief of reinstatement in the service during enquiry.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts are as under :-

(3.) On 7.11.1979, petitioner was served with three different charge-sheets copies of which have been attached as Annexures P/2 to P/4 with the writ petition. Petitioner filed his reply to the charge-sheets, referred to above, on 10.11.1979. On 9.1.1980, Enquiry Officer was appointed. On 18.1.1980, petitioner filed an application asking the Bank not to hold enquiry as criminal cases pending against the petitioner were still going on. Bank authorities did not proceed with the enquiry thereafter. After acquittal of the petitioner on 29.2.1988 by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hissar, the petitioner filed an application on 11.3.1988, requesting the bank to revoke the order of suspension and reinstate him as he had been acquitted by this Court of competent jurisdiction. This request of the petitioner was not acceded to and a fresh charge-sheet containing the same allegations which were contained in the earlier charge-sheets was issued with the direction that he should file his reply to the same within three days from the receipt of the latter failing which it would be presumed that he had nothing to say in his defence. Petitioner's request of reinstatement pending enquiry on the ground that he had been acquitted by a Court of competent jurisdiction was not acceded to and the petitioner being aggrieved has come to this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to take him back in service during the pendency of enquiry.