ORDER :

A.V. Sesha Sai, J.

1. Respondents in W.P.No.18682 of 2014 are the appellants in the present Writ Appeal, preferred under Clause-15 of the Letters Patent.

2. Challenge in the present Writ Appeal is to the Order dated 15.06.2022 passed by the learned single Judge in the aforesaid Writ Petition.

3. Respondent No.1-Writ Petitioner was a Scale-I Officer in the appellant-Bank. The appellant-Bank initiated disciplinary enquiry against the respondent No.1-Writ Petitioner and the disciplinary authority issued a Charge Memo vide Office Order dated 27.09.2013, framing the following charges:

“Charge No.1: Shri D.N.Arjun Kumar has authorized entries allowing TODs in CD A/c.No.3075061443 of M/s.V.R.Projects even though the account was already in debit balance. Thereby he accommodated the party and exposed precious bank funds to financial risk.

Charge No.2: Shri D.N.Arjun Kumar has retained the cheques received in clearing in CD A/c.No.3075061443 of M/s.V.R.Projects to accommodate the party and thereby he exposed precious bank funds to financial risk.

Charge No.3: Shri D.N.Arjun Kumar has passed the Cheque No.145678 dt.01.03.2012 for Rs.10,00,000/- pertaining to CD A/c.No.3075061443 of M/s.V.R.Projects by debiting Branch Adjustment A/c. instead of party’s account to accommodate the party, thereby he exposed precious bank funds to financial risk.

Charge No.4: Shri D.N.Arjun Kumar had with a fraudulent intention and in collusion with another staff member, he has unauthorizedly transferred huge amounts lying in inoperative HSS A/c. term Deposits A/cs to Branch Adjustment A/c. and from that account to third party account without preparing vouchers.

Charge No.5: Shri D.N.Arjun Kumar had allowed cash withdrawals in SB A/cs without verifying the genuineness/correctness of the credit entries made in the accounts thereby he was instrumental in siphoning off of the funds.

Charge No.6: Shri D.N.Arjun Kumar had allowed Demand Loan against deposits to Smt. K.Uma Janaki, Manager without preparing vouchers/loan applications. The proceeds credited to SB A/c. of Smt.B.Radha Rani, Staff Member third party without any authority. The loan was also closed from the SB A/c. of Smt. B.Radha Rani.”

4. Responding to the said Charge Memo, 1st respondent herein submitted an explanation on 03.10.2013.

5. The disciplinary authority appointed an Enquiry Officer and the said Enquiry Officer submitted a report, holding that Charge Nos.1,2,4 and 5 stood proved; Charge No.6 not proved and Charge No.3 stood deleted. Subsequently, a Show Cause Notice was issued by the disciplinary authority on 25.03.2014. After submission of the explanation by the Writ Petitioner-1st respondent herein on 03.04.2014, the disciplinary authority passed an Order of punishment on 5.6.2014, compulsorily retiring the Writ Petitioner-1st respondent from service. As a consequence of the aforesaid Order, the Administrative Order vide Proceedings No.RO:HRD:2014-15:188, dated 12.06.2014 also came to be issued. Assailing the validity and legal sustainability of the aforesaid Order of punishment passed by the disciplinary authority, the Writ Petitioner-1st respondent herein, by invoking the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, filed W.P.No.18682 of 2014. The respondents in the said Writ Petition, who are the appellants herein, contested the Writ Petition, by filing counter affidavit.

6. The learned single Judge, by way of the Order under challenge in the present Writ Appeal, allowed the Writ Petition, setting aside the Order of punishment issued vide Proceedings dated 05.06.2014 by the 3rd appellant-3rd respondent herein and the consequential proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent-2nd appellant herein. In the aforesaid background, the respondents in the Writ Petition have come up before this Court by way of the present Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the the Letters Patent, challenging th