LAWS(PAT)-2014-4-58

KRISHNA BIHARI SINHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On April 23, 2014
Krishna Bihari Sinha Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of Nalanda Gramin Bank (now Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank).

(2.) The petitioner was an officer under erstwhile Nalanda Gramin Bank. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him, which finally culminated into the punishment order dated 23.03.2000 whereby he has been dismissed from service. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the said order. The appeal has been dismissed by a communication dated 18.10.2005. The order dated 23.03.2000 and communication of appellate order dated 18.10.2005 are under challenge in the present writ application.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the appellate order mainly on two counts. He firstly submits that the order of the appellate authority does not disclose any application of mind as no ground taken by the petitioner in his memo of appeal has been considered. He further submits that petitioner's appeal has also been rejected by the appellate authority on the ground of delay in filing of the appeal. He submits that the order dated 23.03.2000 was communicated to the petitioner through letter dated 16.04.2002 issued by the Senior Manager (Personnel) of the Bank, which has been brought on record as annexure-10 to this writ application. His specific stand is that there had been no communication of the order passed by the disciplinary authority prior to issuance of the said letter dated 16.04.2002. He thereafter draws my attention to Rule 31(1) of Nalanda Rural Bank Employees Service Regulation and contends that time limit of 30 days for preferring an appeal under Regulation 30(1) is to be counted from the date of service of the order appealed against. He submits, referring to the letter dated 16.04.2002, that the impugned order dated 23.03.2000 is said to have been communicated to the petitioner by the respondents through ordinary post and under certificate of posting. He submits that there is no proof of service of notice of the order dated 23.03.2000 prior to 16.04.2002.