JUDGMENT

Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J.-Delay condoned. Leave granted.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the Legal Heirs of the original writ petitioner, Shri Ravindra Nath Tiwary (hereinafter referred to as “Shri Tiwary”) against the judgment dated 3rd May, 2010 passed by the Division Bench of the Patna High Court in L.P.A. No.762 of 2010, whereby the Division Bench dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order passed by the learned Single Judge wherein the order of termination passed against Shri Tiwary was affirmed.

3. Appellant No.1, Sushila Tiwary is the wife and appellant Nos.2 to 5, Rajesh, Priyanjali, Sudhansu and Himanshu are the sons and daughter of Shri Tiwary.

4. Shri Tiwary was working as Special Assistant in the Allahabad Bank, Arah Branch (hereinafter referred to as “the Bank”). He was suspended on 11th June, 1990 for certain acts of omission and commission and proceeded departmentally under Clause 19.5(d) and 19.5.(j) of the first Bi-partite Settlement 1966. Two charge-sheets dated 30th June, 1990 and 13th October, 1990 were served on him. The Bank also decided simultaneously to prosecute Shri Tiwary in a criminal case for the criminal act and lodged an FIR with the Arah Police Station. After trial Shri Tiwary was convicted in the criminal case on 19th April, 1999 by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate(SDJM), Bhojpur. He was ordered to undergo RI for one year for the offence punishable under Section 468 IPC and RI for one year for the offence punishable under Section 477(A) IPC.

5. In view of the conviction in the criminal case, the Assistant General Manager, Regional Office, Patna, who was the disciplinary authority, by invoking provisions of Clause 19.6(a) of the Bipartite Settlement, 1966 dismissed Shri Tiwary from the services of the Bank by order No.8/99 dated 21st July, 1999 after giving opportunity of personal hearing to Shri Tiwary. Against the order of conviction Shri Tiwary preferred an appeal in the Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhojpur, who by judgment dated 6th February, 2000, after giving benefit of doubt, had acquitted Shri Tiwary from the charges. After the acquittal Shri Tiwary approached the Bank and informed that he has been acquitted in criminal case by the Appellate Court. The Bank on receipt of such intimation, invoked Clause 19.3(c) of the Bi-partite Settlement and by order No.1/126 dated 2nd July, 2001 ordered that Shri Tiwary will be deemed to have been placed under suspension from the date of original order of dismissal, i.e., 21st July, 1999 and shall continue to remain under suspension until further order. It was further ordered that during the period of suspension he will be entitled to subsistence allowance on the same scale as was getting just prior to his dismissal dated 21st July, 1999. The Assistant General Manager, Regional Office, Patna who was the disciplinary authority brought the aforesaid facts to the notice of Shri Tiwary and informed that his Headquarters has been fixed at Arah.

6. In the departmental enquiry, Shri Tiwary did not choose to participate. Once, he appeared before the Enquiry Officer but later on he again absented and refused to appear. Shri Tiwary moved before the Patna High Court against the order of suspension and revival of departmental proceedings by filing a writ petition, C.W.J.C. No.11479 of 2001. In the said writ petition, in view of the statement made on behalf of the Bank that the departmental enquiry has already been concluded and the Enquiry Officer has already submitted the report, Shri Tiwary withdrew the writ petition on 5th March, 2003 with liberty to raise all the pleas, in case, the order of disciplinary authority goes adverse to him.

7. The disciplinary authority noticed that Shri Tiwary refused to appear before the Enquiry Officer and remained absent. Therefore, the Enquiry Officer had to submit ex parte reports on 3rd September, 2002 and 9th September, 2002 separately for the two different chargesheet