RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
Atmesh Kumar Roy – Appellant
Versus
Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank, District- Patna – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J. - These two writ applications have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The facts are not at all in dispute. The two writ petitioners came in the service of the Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank, while the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 17150 of 2017 joined as a Clerk at the Tekari Branch of the Bank and later on got promoted to the Officer Grade, the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 17256 of 2017 joined the service of the Bank as an Officer and served in different capacities in different branches of the Bank.
3. The petitioners were due to retire from service on 31.07.2013 and 31.03.2014 respectively. Few days prior to their due date of retirement from service they were served with a chargesheet. The petitioner in C.W.J.C. No. 17150 of 2017 was served with a chargesheet dated 18.07.2013 (Annexure 1'). He was called upon to submit his defence to the charges within five days from the date of receipt of the letter. The disciplinary authority invoked Regulations 45(3) and 45(4) of the Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations 2010 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Regulation of 2010'). By virtue of exercise
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.