A.K.Ganguly, J.

1. In this writ petition subject matter of challenge is an order of punishment in respect of the petitioner by Annexure-8 which is an order dated May 20, 1995, by which punishment of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect was imposed on the petitioner. The petitioners appeal against the said order of punishment was also dismissed by the order of the appellate authority dated November 17, 1995.

2. It is not in dispute that a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner on the following charges :-

I. Modern Electric Works deposited a cheque of State Bank of India issued by C.C.L. Dhori of Rs. 13,561.00 on September 7, 1992 in their C/D A/c No. 698. In place of posting the aforesaid cheque, in Modern Electric Works, you posted the cheque in the CD A/c No. 675 of Modern Retraders. Subsequently, on September 16, 1992 you made the purported necessary correction in the CD A/cs of Modern Electric Works and Modern Retraders. While drawing the correct balance in C/D A/c of Modern Electric Works, the purported correct balance was drawn more by Rs. 10,000.00 . While balancing the C/D ledgers of September 25, 1992 on November 13, 1992 the error of Rs. 10,000.00 was located and while drawing the correct balance in the A/c, an overdraft of Rs. 8,663.00 was created.

II. Shri Krishna Prasad is maintaining one S/B A/c. No. 1475 with Phusro Bazar Branch.

The balance in the aforesaid S/B A/c of Sri Krishna Prasad on March 27, 1991 was only 2919.63. You drew the purported correct balance in the A/c some day between March 27, 1991 and April 27, 1991 and made it Rs. 10,919.63. While balancing the S/B ledgers on November 21, 1991, the mistake was located resulting in overdrawing of the aforesaid S/C A/c by Rs. 7,370.37.

III. Star Motor Repairing Works was granted one CGC C/C facility by Phusro Bazar Branch of a limit of Rs. 25,000.00 with margin stipulation of 50% on October 13, 1988.

The debit balance in the aforesaid A/c (C/C) was Rs. 24,835.35 on August 17, 1992. A cheque of Rs. 5,000.00 was presented on August 17, 1992 over the counter by Star Motor Repairing Works. While discharging your clerical duties at C/D counter, you unauthorisedly allowed overlimit by Rs. 4835.35 in the aforesaid A/c.

IV. While discharging your duties at the cash payment counter On April 13, 1992, a cheque of Rs. 6,000.00 drawn by Alam Welding Works was paid by you without being cancelled by the competent official. On the same day another cheque of Rs. 25,000.00 drawn by Rahul Engineering Works was paid without its being cancelled. While discharging your duties as clerk on October 23, 1992, you posted a cheque in the CD A/c of R.K. Pandey & Co. of Rs. 1,58,548.00 while the balance in the A/c was only Rs. 76,745,53 thereby creating an overdraft of Rs. 81,802.47.

3. After the said charges were communicated to the petitioner, he was also informed about the list of the witnesses by whom and also the list of documentary evidence on the basis of which charges are to be sustained.

4. In respect of those charges the petitioner filed his written statement. Thereafter Enquiry Officer and the Presenting Officer were appointed for holding regular enquiry.

5. The petitioner did not attend the enquiry. This Court is not satisfied with the explanation of the petitioner in the writ petition for not attending the enquiry. In fact, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also did not advance any argument that the petitioner had any justification for not attending the enquiry. Therefore, the fact remains that, despite notice, the petitioner did not attend enquiry, and the enquiry proceeded ex parte. Even then from Annexure-4 which are the proceedings of the enquiry and Annexure-5 which is report of the enquiry, it appears that the disciplinary authority took care to prove the charges by producing both oral and documentary evidence, and by producing witnesses. So, even in the absence of petitioner, the Bank authorities took the troub