The importance of integrity and honesty in the banking sector, the purpose of a disciplinary proceeding by an employer, and the compliance with the rules of natural justice in disciplinary enquiries.

JUDGMENT :

(Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of respondent No.3-The Board of Directors and Appellate Authority, Vidharbha Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Akola dated 03/11/2012 by which the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed by denying any interference in the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority in the enquiry proceedings.

3. The petitioner herein was initially appointed as a Probationary Officer with the Yavatmal Gramin Bank and subsequently appointed as a Junior Management Scale–I Officer with the said Bank. On 12/09/2005, during the amalgamation of rural banks, respondent No.1-Vidharbha Kshetriya Gramin Bank was constituted and the petitioner was absorbed in it on the same post. The service conditions of Officers and Employees of the respondent No.1-Bank are regulated by the Vidharbha Kshetriya Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2005. The respondent No.2 is the Chairman acting as a Competent Authority and respondent No.3 is the Board of Directors acting as an Appellate Authority.

4. The petitioner was working as a Second Officer at Wadgaon Branch of respondent No.1-Bank from May, 2007 to May, 2009. The respondent No.1-Bank had issued two separate charge-sheets to the petitioner alleging certain acts of misconducts while he was posted at Wadgaon Branch. After holding departmental enquiry the petitioner was dismissed from service vide order dated 27/03/2012 passed by respondent No.2-Competent Authority. The petitioner had preferred an appeal before respondent No.3-Board of Directors acting as an Appellate Authority. The said appeal also came to be dismissed on 03/11/2012. The termination order was confirmed by the Appellate Authority is under challenge in this petition.

5. The first charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner by respondent No.1-Bank dated 16/10/2009 bearing No.VKGM/HO/ VIG/2009/233/1. The following three charges were framed against the petitioner :

(i) On 09/03/2009, Mr. A.A. Joshi (petitioner) has attempted to defraud/misappropriate an amount of Rs.3150/-by closing the cash on 09/03/2009 with malafide intention. This is an act of gross negligence and dereliction of duty which violates the Regulation No.19 of the Vidharbha Kshetriya Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2005.

(ii) Mr. Joshi being Second Officer in the Branch Wadgaon has passed the withdrawal for Rs.30,000/-dated 19/03/2009 by overlooking the specimen signature of Smt. Khatri. It is observed from the above withdrawal with naked eyes that Mr. Joshi has filled up the withdrawal form and put himself a forge signature of Smt. Khatri. The signature on the withdrawal form is also not tallied with the signature on no objection letter submitted by Mr. Joshi obtained from Smt. Khatri regarding transaction in her HSS account No.5029 which is an act of falsification and unbecoming of an Officer of the Bank, which violated the Regulation No.19 of the Vidharbha Kshetriya Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2005.

(iii) Mr. Joshi has availed loan from outside financial agencies without obtaining permission of the Competent Authority, which is the violation of Regulation No.26 of the Vidharbha Kshetriya Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2005.

6. The petitioner had submitted his reply to the said charge-sheet on 06/11/2009. The sum and substance of the petitioner’s reply that entry regarding Rs.3150/-ought to have taken on the credit side. It was wrongly taken on debit side. The mistake of taking entry was noticed at the time of verification which was corrected. The petitioner had further explained regarding second charge that he withdrawn the amount on behalf of Mrs. Khatri who had no complaint about the said transaction. As respondent No.1-Bank despite repeated request not responded to the request of the petitioner hence he availed financial assistance from outside agencie