The present appeal assails order dated 6.12.2012 passed in CWJC No.13188 of 2010. The Learned Single Judge held that the punishment of dismissal was excessive. It was set aside and the matter remanded to reconsider the punishment opining that withholding one increment for six months would be sufficient considering that the delinquent had been deceased in the meantime and was substituted by his son.

2. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submitted that the delinquent had been charged on two counts : (a) not caring for bank’s discipline and neglecting the work allotted to him (b) leaving office early on five specified dates without permission of the competent authority without attending to works allotted and tampering the attendance register. The delinquent filed his reply to the two charges on merits. A presenting officer had been appointed. Five prosecution witnesses had led evidence. Documentary evidence was led in support of the charges proved by prosecution witnesses marked as Exhibit PEX 1 to PEX 13. The delinquent did not lead any evidence in defence except himself and relied on no documentary evidence. The enquiry officer returned a finding of guilt. A second show ca