JUDGMENT :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel respresenting the bank.

2. The petitioner, a clerk cum cashier in the respondent bank, has been visited with an order of punishment by the disciplinary authority on 31.1.2003. Dismissal under the said order has been assailed by the petitioner before the appellate authority. Appeal of the petitioner against the order of dismissal has also been rejected on 28.6.2004. It is these two orders which are impugned in the instant writ proceedings.

3. Factual background leading to the order of dismissal is that the petitioner was served with a charge memo by the authorities on 30.3.2002. The charge memo is in relation to a period when the petitioner was posted as Clerk cum cashier in Kurthol branch of the respondent bank. The allegation against the petitioner have broadly been enumerated into four charges. Various acts of misappropriation of the funds available in the branch are attributed to the petitioner in connivance with the Branch Manager of the bank. Specific instances have been given whereby the petitioner in connivance with the Branch Manager has misappropriated the amounts by making out drafts in the name o