JUDGMENT :

SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.

1. The present Writ Petition has been preferred praying for the following reliefs:-

“……a) A writ of and/or writs in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents, their men, agents or assigns from canceling and/or rescinding and/or setting aside the charge sheet dated 09.12.2006, enquiry report dated 11.01.2008, penalty order dated 22.04.2008, appellate order dated 18.04.2009 and all proceedings in relation thereto.

b) A writ in the nature of prohibition, prohibiting the respondents to proceed with penalty order dated 22.04.2009 and appellate order dated 11.04.2009…….”

2. The petitioner’s case:-

“…….1. The petitioner was kept under suspension vide Memo No. 20/HDW/DSP/71 dated 17.05.2006 and thereafter the writ petitioner was served with a show cause notice dated 21.06.2006 issued by the Deputy General Manager State Bank of India under Memo No. 20/HDW/DSP/71 on some purported alleged irregularities.

2. The petitioner submitted his reply on 24.07.2006 stating inter alia that-

i) He was not in service at Bagmari from, 04.01.2000 to 06.01.2006 and thus regarding any incidence beyond the said period he cannot be held liable, to which the authorities have never replied.

ii) He was duty bound to release one STDR No.450835 since the matured value of the same in the name of Sri Sikdar, exceeded the cash credit limit by Rs. 1.6 lacs. And for the same as per rules he did not require any permission from any other higher authority since he himself had authority of sanctioning upto Rs. 2 lacs.

3. That the acts have been done in compliance with customers written instructions and as per Banking Rules and norms hence no irregularity was there.

4. On 09.02.2006 a charge sheet was issued to the petitioner on the following charges inter alia that-

i) Twenty (20) produce Marketing Loans (PML) (as detailed in Annexure-III) aggregating Rs. 1.15 crores against the cold storage bond of M/s Muktakeshi Cold Storage Pvt Ltd., (MCSPL) were sanctioned by him during the period March 2002 to April, 2002. Another 06 (six) more PMLs were also sanctioned by him in April 2003 (Annexure-V) under the same scheme. Though, renewal of credit limits were not allowed under the PML scheme, he renewed all 26 (twenty six) loans in the year 2003-2004 without observing Bank’s laid down instructions for the scheme (Annexure-V).

ii) Shri Sikdar freely allowed the borrowers for transferring the funds from one account to another (AnnexureVI) to enable them to liquidate the old outstanding and to get sanction of fresh loans by the same borrowers.

iii) It is reported that loans were sanctioned to persons who are either close relative of the Directors (Sri Basudeb Ghosh) of MCSPL or were employees of the firm at the material time (Annexure-VIII).

iv) Further it is observed that before sanctioning the loans farmers were not identified as genuine framer growers by the BDO/AE/Gramsevak/Anchal Prodhan / Fram Adbyaksha.

v) He had also not obtained the Title deed/Pattas of land from them for identification of the farmer growers.

vi) In contravention of AGL Circular No.212A of 1974 dated 10.03.1979 a loan was sanctioned by him to Shri Amit Kumar Pal, A/C. No. 01670081065 who deals in Motor parts and is not a potato grower.

5. The proceedings was held from 09.08.2007 to 13.09.2007.

6. On 15.01.2008 the disciplinary authority forwarded the enquiry report dated 11.01.2008.

7. On 05.06.2008 the Writ petitioner submitted his defence statement to enquiry report dated 10.01.2008.

8. On 22.04.2009 the Disciplinary authority imposed a punishment order inflicting dismissal as per Rule 67(1) of S.B.I. office circular Rules (SBI DSR).

9. The writ petitioner made an appeal followed by Amended Appeal dated 05.06.2008, 09.09.2008, 16.02.2009 praying for reconsideration in terms of order dated 22.08.2007 by Judicial Magistrate 1st Court whereby and hereunder the writ petitioner has been exonerated of all the charges identical to charge sheet dated 09.02.2006.

10. On 18.04.2009 the appellat