JUDGMENT

S.B. MAJMUDAR, J.

(1) THE appellant-Bank by special leave has brought in challenge the order passed by the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High court in Writ Petition No. 3841 of 1986 decided on 30/7/1993. Respondent 1 was the writ petitioner before the High court. The short question involved in this appeal is as to whether the Assistant General Manager of the Patna Division of the appellant-Bank was entitled to pass the penalty order against Respondent 1.

(2) IN order to appreciate the nature of controversy between the parties it is necessary to note a few background facts.

(3) RESPONDENT 1 was serving in the appellant-Bank in the Junior Management Scale I while posted in the regional office of the appellant- Bank at Lucknow. He was served with a charge-sheet dated 24/8/1983 containing charges of misconduct as Manager of the Palia Kalan Branch of the Allahabad Bank, District Lakhimpur-Kheri during the period from April 197 9/12/1980.

(4) THE charge-sheet was served on Respondent 1 by the Deputy General Manager of the Bank working at the central Zone, Lucknow. The said disciplinary authority appointed Shri B.B. Shesh as Enquiry Officer to enquire into the charges of misconduct. The said appointment was made by the Deputy General Manager on 19-12-1983. It appears that the disciplinary proceedings continued for quite some time and in the meantime on 15-7- 1985 Respondent 1-employee was transferred from Lucknow to Ranchi, Bihar. Respondent 1 unsuccessfully challenged his transfer order before the High court. His writ petition was ultimately not pressed. The enquiry was completed on 24/2/1986. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report together with the records of the enquiry proceedings and other documents to the disciplinary authority.

(5) IT appears that after transfer of Respondent 1 to Ranchi branch of the Bank, the Assistant General Manager, Zonal Office, Allahabad Bank, Patna Zone took over as the disciplinary authority in respect of the pending enquiry against Respondent 1. On 20/3/1986 the Assistant General Manager informed Respondent 1-officer that he has been nominated by the competent authority to act as the disciplinary authority in respect of the enquiry against him.

(6) THAT after considering the report of the Enquiry Officer and record of the proceedings, the Assistant General Manager, Zonal Office, Patna, passed an order dated 21/3/1986 dismissing Respondent 1 from service of the Bank in terms of Regulation No. 4 of the Allahabad Bank (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as "the Regulations"),

(7) RESPONDENT 1 challenged the said order of dismissal by filing a writ petition in the Allahabad High court, Lucknow bench. In the said writ petition Respondent 1 raised various contentions for challenging the impugned order. One of the contentions canvassed before the High court by Respondent 1 was to the effect that when disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him by the Deputy General Manager, central Zone, Lucknow, the Assistant General Manager, Zonal Office, Patna had no authority or jurisdiction to pass the impugned dismissal order and it was the disciplinary authority which initiated the proceedings which was competent to pass the final order of penally, if any. The appellant-Bank resisted the petition and contended amongst others that as per the Regulations the Assistant General Manager, Zonal Office, Patna was fully competent as a disciplinary authority to pass the impugned dismissal order. The High court took the view that Respondent 7, the Assistant General Manager, Patna Zone, Patna was not competent to pass the impugned order of dismissal. Only on this short ground the writ petition was allowed. The High court did not, therefore, go into the other contentions canvassed by Respondent 1 against the impugned order of dismissal. The High court accordingly set aside the order dated 21/3/1986 as contained in