Disciplinary proceedings must be substantiated with oral evidence; reliance solely on documents, without testimonial support, renders findings invalid.

JUDGMENT :

PARTHA SARTHY, J.

1. The appellant has filed the instant appeal against the judgment dated 23.2.2024 passed in CWJC no.1323 of 2020, whereby the learned Single Judge was pleased to dismiss the writ application. The appellant had filed the writ application praying for quashing the order of punishment dated 7.6.2019, whereby the punishment of reduction to the post of Award Staff fixing the basic pay as Rs.21,240/- per month was imposed on the appellant with a further order that the period of suspension would be treated not on-duty. The appellant had also prayed for quashing the appellate order dated 20.11.2019.

2. The relevant facts in brief are that while the appellant was posted as the Assistant Branch Manager in the Munger Branch of the State Bank of India, an F.I.R. being Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case no.341 of 2013 was registered against him on 9.7.2013 for offence under sections 406 and 420 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE . On investigation final form was submitted and the same was accepted by the learned Court below on 24.2.2016. With the acceptance of the final form, the criminal case stood closed. The petitioner was proceeded against in a disciplinary proceeding in terms of Rule 68(1) of the State Bank of India Officers’ Service Rules, 1992 (‘the Rules of 1992’ in short) on the following charges :-

“(i) On 15.03.2013, you unauthorisedly posted and passed a voucher for Rs.50,000/- for debit to S.B. Account no. 11859364685 of Shri Parmeshwari Thakur and credited the proceeds to your own S.B. Account no. 10789017933, maintained at Munger Branch. Later on, you have restored the amount of Rs.50,000/- to the above mentioned S.B. Account of Shri Parmeshwari Thakur on 25.3.2013 from your O.D. Account no. 10788905146 maintained at Munger Branch.

(ii) On 13.03.2013, you have opened a S.B. Account no. 32880557595 in your own name under the segment “Personal Public- Others” and under a new CIF no. 86653881021, without obtaining permission from competent authority. In this account, you have concealed your SBI identity, local address and PAN no. against extant instructions of the Bank.

(iii) You were on unauthorised absence from duty from 10.05.2013 to 05.06.2013.”

3. The departmental proceeding started and the Enquiry Officer submitted an enquiry report dated 6.5.2014, the summary of the report being that the allegation no. 1 was not proved while allegation nos. 2 and 3 were found to be proved. The charges having been partly proved, the disciplinary authority along with the letter dated 12.5.2014 served a copy of the enquiry report on the appellant observing that they did not agree with the findings of the enquiring authority with respect to the allegation no.1. Observing that the disciplinary authority/appointing authority will take the final decision after examining the enquiry report, the appellant was given liberty to file his representation within a period seven days. The appellant submitted his reply on which the appointing authority by order contained in letter dated 6.2.2015 imposed the penalty of dismissal on the appellant.

4. The order of dismissal was challenged by the appellant in this Court in CWJC no. 4163 of 2015 which was withdrawn by order dated 19.3.2015. A review application being Civil Review no. 106 of 2015 preferred by the State Bank of India against the order dated 19.3.2015 passed in the writ application was dismissed imposing a cost of Rs. 25,000/- on the Bank.

5. The appellant preferred a statutory appeal which was rejected by the appellate authority on 18.9.2015. The appellant challenged the order of the appellate authority in CWJC