MANOJ KUMAR Vs. GENERAL MANAGER SBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant.

(2.) Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant writ-Petitioner while assailing the order of punishment in a departmental proceeding and its affirmance by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order dated 27.3.2009 in CWJC No. 13805 of 2002 has submitted that the charge on which he was dismissed from service were not actually attributable against him. In this context, he had tried to assail the findings of the Enquiry Officer by taking a plea that the Appellant-writ Petitioner holding the post of cashier was punished for the lapses and misconduct committed by the Branch Manager of the concerned branch of the State Bank of India, hereinafter referred to as the Bank. In nutshell the whole effort of the learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant-Petitioner was that this Court should examine the charges and reappraise the evidence adduced in course of departmental proceeding of the Appellant-writ Petitioner.

(3.) On a perusal of the enquiry report, this Court would find that the charge against the Petitioner was proved with the help of as many as 12 documentary evidence and four witnesses examined by the Bank wherein the enquiry officer had also taken into consideration the evidence of five defence witnesses produced by the Appellant-writ Petitioner in course of enquiry. The enquiry report would go to show that there was a detailed analysis of said evidence in respect of each of the charge whereafter the Enquiry Officer had found the charge Nos. 1 and 3 to be proved by recording following findings: