C K JHA, SON OF LATE RUDRA NARAYAN JHA Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, NEW DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition with a prayer to quash/set aside the order dated 11.12010, passed by the Disciplinary Authority, as communicated to him vide Letter No. COR: HRD: MR: C, dated 18.12010, whereby and where under major penalty of reduction to two lower stages in time scale of pay, as on the date of superannuation i.e. 31.01.2010, has been imposed upon him in garb of provision enshrined in Regulation 4(f) of the Punjab National Bank Officers Employees (Discipline & Appeal) Regulation, 1977. Petitioner has further prayed to quash part of the order dated 09.07.2011, passed by appellate authority whereby and where under the appellate authority has refused to set aside entire order of punishment as imposed upon the petitioner. Petitioner has further prayed to quash charge sheet issued to him as contained in letter no. HRDD: DAC: 15235, dated 23.01.2010 and enquiry report, as contained in Letter no. HRDD: DSE: 15235, dated 108.2010, whereby and where under it is said that the charges against the petitioner were proved to the extent discussed in the enquiry report.

(3.) The facts of the case in short as has been delineated in the writ petition is that petitioner was initially appointed as Agriculture Officer on 19.06.1978 and was promoted from one post to another. He was promoted to the post of Deputy General Manager on 01.06.2008. While holding post of Deputy General Manager (FI) at Circle Office, Ranchi, a letter dated 22.09.2009 was served upon him advising him to give remarks on a tabular form received from the office of Inspector and Audit Department, Circle Office, Patna and in compliance thereof petitioner submitted his remarks on 01.10.2009. Thereafter, petitioner was served with charge sheet as contained in Letter No. HRDD: DSE: 15235, Dated 201.2010. Petitioner submitted his reply to the charge sheet on 25.01.2010 denying the allegations and prayed for his exoneration of the charges. Though the petitioner was to retire on 31.01.2010 but by letter dated 30.01.2010 he was intimated that the departmental proceeding would continued against him even after his retirement.