SUMITRA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application was earlier filed by Hira Prasad (hereinafter referred to as the writ petitioner). After his death, his legal heirs i. e. wife and other children have been substituted in his place and allowed to prosecute this writ application. This application has been filed for issuance of an appropriate writ for quashing the order dated 30th of January, 1999 whereby the writ petitioner, who was an employee of the State of Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) has been dismissed from service. Further prayer is to quash the order dated 18th September, 1999 (Annexure-23) whereby the appeal preferred by writ petitioner against the order of dismissal passed by the disciplinary authority, has been dismissed.

(2.) The case has a chequered history, writ petitioner was an employee of the State Bank of India (for short the Bank). A departmental enquiry was initiated against him for having granted bank loan to large number of persons without proper documentation and without verifying their credit worthiness and for obtaining illegal gratification in that connection. The Inquiry Officer submitted the report holding the writ petitioner guilty. The disciplinary authority agreeing with the conclusion of the Inquiry Officer and following the procedure passed the order of dismissal from service. Writ petitioner filed C.W. J.C. No. 1979 of 1988 before this Court impugning the order of dismissal. This Court by order dated 8th of July, 1988 found the order of dismissal to be bad in law and consequently set aside the same. While doing so, this Court observed as follows:--

(3.) In view of observation referred to above the Bank proceeded to hold enquiry and ultimately the petitioner was again dismissed from service. Challenge to the order of dismissal passed by the Bank by the writ petitioner in C. W. J.C. No. 3430 of 1991 failed. Aggrieved by the same, he moved the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court in its judgment dated 2-3-1993 in the case of Heera Prasad v. State Bank of India and Ors. (1993( 1) BLJ R 703) found the order of the dismissal to be bad in law. While setting aside the order of dismissal, the Supreme Court observed as follows:--