1. Heard leaned counsel for petitioner as well as leaned counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 6.

2. At the very outset, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that during pendency of the writ petition the petitioner has crossed the age of superannuation on 31.1.2016 and as of today, the writ petition is relevant in view of the stigma attached to the petitioner by way of awarding him punishment of compulsory superannuation vide order dated 10.12.2004 (Annexure 5), passed by the Disciplinary authority (respondent no. 5) and the appellate order dated 2.8.2005, contained in Annexure 7, passed by respondent no. 4.

3. The pleadings and undisputed facts of the case are that the charge memo dated 30.9.2003 (Annexure 1) came to be served upon the petitioner in relation to some allegations for a period when he was working as Computer Terminal Operator (C.T.O.) in the Boring Road branch of the Central Bank of India. The charge sheet distinctly makes out charge that the petitioner had scanned a fake signature of the account holder to facilitate fraudulent withdrawals of total sum of Rs. 38,800/- on five different dates, details of which are given in the charge memo. There are th