ARUN SOOD Vs. UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is working as an officer JMS-I with the respondent-bank. He has filed the above writ petition for quashing the impugned order dated 3.11.1993 (Annexure P-9) whereby after holding departmental disciplinary proceedings, he was awarded major penalty of removal from bank's service with immediate effect, and order dated 27.6.1994 (Annexure P-12) whereby his appeal against the order of his removal from bank's service was rejected. Since the operation of these impugned orders remained stayed during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner continues to be in service.

(2.) On the allegations against the.petitioner that while working as Branch Manager, Darlaghat during the period from 15.7.1982 to 2.4.1986, he advanced loan of Rs. 20,000 to non-existent borrowers in" fictitious names, he was convicted and sentenced in a criminal case under Sections 420, 120-B, 465, 467, 468 and 477-A, I.P.C. read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act by the Sessions Judge, Solan vide judgment dated 25.11.1991, on the basis of which notice to show cause dated 27.1.1992 for his dismissal from bank service w.e.f. the date of his conviction was served upon the petitioner, which he had challenged in C.W.P. No. 86 of 1992. On the statement of learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-bank that the petitioner will be given personal hearing in the proceedings initiated by the notice to show cause, the said writ petition was disposed of on 6.5.1992 with liberty reserved to the petitioner to move this court for subsequent cause of action.- Thereafter, when the representation of the petitioner was rejected by the General Manager (Personal) vide Telex dated 25.11.1992 with direction to Zonal Manager, Shimla to proceed with passing of final orders, the petitioner filed another writ petition No. 942 of 1992, in which by interim order dated 8.12.1992, which was confirmed on 17.8.1993, the respondent bank was restrained from dispensing with the services of the petitioner, with the result the final order dated 2.12.1992, which by then was not served upon the petitioner, remained suspended. Keeping this in view the writ petition was allowed and the impugned order dated "2.12.1992 dismissing the petitioner from the bank service was quashed by judgment dated 12.11.1998.

(3.) Simultaneously, for the same charges' disciplinary proceedings were also started against the petitioner and after holding departmental enquiry the petitioner was removed from bank service by order dated 3.11.1993 (Annexure P-9) by holding the petitioner guilty of advancing loan to a non-existent borrower in fictitious name of Bhagat Ram son of Surat Ram and thus acted fraudulently, misused his position as Manager and failed to discharge his duties honestly and to the satisfaction of the Bank. The appeal of the petitioner against the order of termination was also dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 27.6.1994 (Annexure P-12). Hence, the present writ petition.