VINAY KUMAR RAI SON OF LATE BRAJ NANDAN SINGH Vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Mukesh Kant, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ajay Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent/Central Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as 'Bank').

(2.) The petitioner has approached this Court invoking its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to quash the appellate order dated 04-02-2009 whereby the punishment imposed upon the petitioner of compulsory retirement has been confirmed. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of entire disciplinary proceeding, which was initiated against him.

(3.) Before I proceed further, it would be necessary to notice that on 02-07-2009, a Bench of this Court had categorically said that "This application can only be considered for the limited aspect of proportionality of sentence. There are no other legal issues involved to be considered" and thereafter, the learned counsel for the Bank was asked to file counter affidavit.