MANIKCHANDPRASAD Vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ application has been filed by the petitioner against the order of his dismissal dated 4. 1994, passed by the disciplinary authority, namely, the Regional Manager, Central Bank of India (Respondent No. 3) and the order of the appellate authority dated 1st July, 1994 upholding the aforesaid order of dismissal, as contained in an- nexures 13 and 17, respectively.

(2.) It appears that on 2.4.1992 the petitioner was served with chargesheet in regard to allegation of defrauding the Chiragaon Branch of the Bank in 1985 by forging bank documents in connivance with outsiders. After a regular departmental enquiry the Inquiring Authority submitted his findings to the Disciplinary Authority on 14.12.93 whereupon the impugned order dated 22.4.94 was passed by the Disciplinary Authority imposing the punishment of dismissal to the petitioner. Against the said order the petitioner preferred appeal before the Appellate Authority, who, after going through the entire records of the case, such as, enquiry proceedings, documentary evidences adduced in the enquiry, written brief of P.O. submissions of the charge-sheeted officer and finding of the Inquirying Authority, etc. passed the impugned order dated 1st July, 94 upholding the orders of the disciplinary Authority.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that both the impugned orders are bad in law, as the same have been passed in utter violation of principle of natural justice inasmuch as, besides denying the reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to defend his case, the said orders have been passed without even supplying the copy of the inquiry report and requiring him to show cause before imposition of the punishment. The learned Counsel also submitted that from the very perusal of the impugned order of dismissal, passed by the Disciplinary Authority, it would appear that no cogent reason has been assigned by him and thus the same is fit to be set aside on that ground as well.