This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging order dated 26.09.1995 by which the Disciplinary Authority-cum-Chairman, Madhubani Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Madhubani (hereinafter referred to as the Bank for the sake of brevity) inflicted punishment of reduction of three annual increments in the time scale of pay in respect of Charge No.1 series and warning in respect of Charge No.2 and 3 and also challenging appellate order dated 07.11.1996 by which the Board of Directors of the Bank disposed of petitioner’s appeal merely reducing punishment to reduction of one annual increment of the petitioner without rescinding the entire order of the disciplinary authority.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that petitioner was working as a Field Supervisor in the respondent-Bank which is a Regional Rural Bank for the last 10 years with satisfactory record of service, but while working at Chatra Branch of the Bank in the year 1994 he was subjected to domestic enquiry on the alleged irregularities committed by him in Maheshwara Branch of the Bank in the year 1984, 1985, 1987, 1988 and 1989 and charge sheet dated 14.01.1994 was issued framing three charges which are as follows:-

1(A) Sri Ganpati Singh, Field Supervisor (Officer), when posted at Maheshwara Branch done lot of irregularities there in advancement of loans. That is why he recommended for sanction of loans twice/thrice to one borrower without keeping in view the purpose of loans & its feasibility. In this way Sri Singh has done works detrimental to the Bank interest avoiding section 19 of Madhubani Kshetriya Gramin bank (Staff) Service Regulation, 1980.

1(B) Sri Singh was habitual of obtaining over-drafts from Branch for the purpose of purchasing assets to the borrowers, but after getting signature/thumb impressions from borrowers ever required papers for loans, he used to disburse cash amount in phases to them (borrowers). During disbursement of cash amount, borrowers were paid less amount by Sri Ganpati Singh and that is why a considerable amount remained outstanding for payment, though the concerned loan ledger a/c was debited with sanctioned amount. Hence, a statement of account was prepared by Sri Attaullah Shah, the then Messenger cum Sweeper of the branch under guidance of Sri Ganpati singh, F. S. in which it has clearly been mentioned that some amount is due to Sri Ganpati Singh for payment to the borrowers. The Investigating Officer has also agreed with the facts.

In this way Sri Singh has done his duty against section 19 (Ninteen) of Madhubani Kshetriya Gramin Bank (Staff) Service Regulation, 1980.

1(C) During field visit of Sri Awadhesh Kumar Sinha, present Branch Officer, Maheshwara Branch some borrowers lodged written complain that Sri Ganpati Singh had not made full payment of sanctioned loan amount to them (borrowers).

This work has been done by Sri Singh detrimental to the interest of the Bank avoiding Section 19 (Nineteen) of Madhubani Kshetriya Gramin Bank (Staff) Service Regulation, 1980.

2. Sri Ganpati Singh has concealed the facts regarding preparation of statement of a/c by Sri Attaullah Shah, Messenger cum Sweeper regarding dues of the borrowers meaning thereby that though Sri Singh dictated the messenger cum Sweeper for preparation of a/c, yet he (Sri Singh) has denied with the facts.

In this way Sri Singh avoided Section 16, 17, 18, 19 of the Madhubani Kshetriya Gramin Bank (Staff) Service Regulation, 1980.

3. Sri Ganpati Singh did not pay attention towards recovery of old dues to the borrowers and recommended for second/third loan in many cases so that recovery position of branch deteriorated since 1985 to 1992.

In this way he (Sri Singh) has not done works in the interest of the Bank and avoided section 19 of Madhubani Kshetriya Gramin Bank (Staff) Service Regulation 1980.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that all the aforesaid charges were stale and vague and were not enumerated as mis