The petitioner, an employee of the respondent Bank, having been removed from service on an allegation of misconduct, laid challenge against the said dismissal in the present writ petition.

The facts in brief are as follows: The petitioner, when working as a Clerk/Shroff in one of the branches of the respondent bank in Chittoor District, was alleged to have committed certain irregularities, as a result of which, he was charge sheeted on 18.01.2003 by the Circle Head and Disciplinary Authority, Circle Office, Chittoor.

The core of the charge is that on 04.06.2001, an entry for Rs.10,000/- under token No.6 was made in the name of a fictitious person, and the money said to have been paid by the petitioner in the cash counter under the said token was misappropriated by himself, since the very transaction was fictitious.

Not satisfied with the explanation submitted by the petitioner to the articles of charges framed against him, the respondent bank went ahead with the departmental enquiry, which resulted in an order of removal dated 28.08.2006 passed by the disciplinary authority, the 2nd respondent. Later, though an intra-departmental appeal was filed by the petitioner, it, too, was dismissed through an order dated 15.02.2008. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

Before adverting to the submissions of the respective counsel, the course of departmental proceedings may be put in perspective.

The transaction of payment of Rs.10,000/- in the name of fictitious person involved three persons. The branch in which the petitioner was working at the material point of time being a rural branch, it had a skeletal staff of three members – Manager, Clerk/Shroff (the petitioner) and the sub-staff (Attender).

The Version of the Respondent Bank:

On 04.06.2001, an entry of Rs.10,000/- was made in the token register by the sub-staff and was initialled by the Manager under token serial No.6, the transaction being a loan against a deposit purportedly to have been availed by one Sri G.Gopal. The transaction was not supported by any debit voucher or document. On the strength of this entry made in the token register in the name of Sri G.Gopal, believed to be non-existent, the petitioner, in his position as the cashier, took advantage of the situation and reflected an entry in the cash register as if it had been paid to the said person and misappropriated the amount.

The petitioner, being the only clerk in the branch, was also assigned the task of writing the day book. To cover up the payment so made, he altered the debit side figure under the head of loans from Rs.10,535/- to Rs.20,535/- without any supporting debit voucher for Rs.10,000/-.

When eventually the deficit in the cash balance came to light, the petitioner displayed posters written in vernacular (Telugu) in and around the villages of the branch, without taking leave from the authorities, appealing to the public to return the money to the branch if by oversight somebody had withdrawn the money. Presto, the money was found lying in a packet at the branch couple of days later when the staff came over to open the branch.

Sequence of Events:

On 20.07.2001 (two weeks later), the branch manager informs the circle office about the incident; soon thereafter, on 23.07.2001 vigilance officer visited the branch and investigated the incident; and on 27.07.2001 the manager informed the circle officer that the money was recovered.

On 03.09.2001 the disciplinary authority issued a show cause notice to all the three staff members of the branch. On or about 22nd ofOn 03.09.2001 the disciplinary authority issued a show cause notice to all the three staff members of the branch. On or about 22nd of the same month all the three submitted their replies, based on which the sub-staff was exonerated. On 05.10.2002, as the disciplinary authority was not satisfied with the reply submitted by the petitioner, he issued a second show cause notice to the petitioner. When the petitioner