BALWINDER SINGH Vs. THE NAWANSHAHR CENTRAL CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Order Annexure P-12 dated 17.8.1993 passed by the respondent Bank terminating the services of the petitioner from the post of Head Clerk-cum-Cashier-Typist has been made the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition. The petitioner has prayed for the quashing of this order and for the reinstatement and consequential benefits.

(2.) The case set up by the petitioner is that he has passed B A. examination conducted by the Varanasey Sanskrit Vishwavidyala Varanasey, in the year 1988. He applied for selection and appointment on the post of Clerk-cum-Cashier in the service of the respondent-Bank. He had produced all his documents at the time of interview. He was found suitable and was then appointed in the service of the respondent-Bank as Clerk-cum-Cashier-cum- Typist vide memo dated 3.3.1992. Due to some change in the composition of the respondent-Bank a notice was issued to him to show as to how he was qualified for the post of Clerk-cum- Cashier. The petitioner has stated that he produced various documents to satisfy the respondent-Bank that he possessed the requisite qualification for recruitment to the post of Clerk-cum- Cashier and that his appointment was fully justified, but the authorities of the Bank insisted on taking action against him. This compelled him to file a civil writ in the Court of Additional Senior Sub-Judge, Nawanshahr, who passed an order of injunction in the petitioner's favour. Against the order of injunction passed by the Additional Senior Sub Judge, the Bank filed a revision petition before the High Court. In Civil Revision No.2316 of 1993 the High Court passed a stay order in favour of the Bank on 16.8.1993. According to the petitioner, the Bank persuaded the High Court to pass stay order in its favour by concealing material facts. Sub-sequendy, the suit filed by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, the revision petition filed by respondent No.1 was also dismissed as withdrawn. The petitioner has stated that during the currency of the stay order passed by the High Court the respondent Bank passed the impugned order and dismissed him from service.

(3.) The petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the ground that the degree possessed by him was genuine inasmuch as it was awarded by the Varanasey Sanskrit Vishwavidyala, Varanasey, and that no material was available with the respondent to conclude that the degree produced by the petitioner was fake or bogus. The petitioner has also pleaded that without holding an enquiry into the matter and without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the respondent-Bank could not have passed the impugned order of dismissal.