SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Del) 1230

MANMOHAN SINGH
Gopal Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Canara Bank – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. V.H. Pillai, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Ms. Meenakshi Sood, Advocate for the Respondent.

Manmohan Singh, J.

1. That the petitioner has field the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a writ of mandamus thereby quashing the impugned orders dated 26.12.2005 passed by the appellate authority, order dated 5.3.2005 passed by the disciplinary authority and the Inquiry report dated 11.9.2004.

2. Petitioner joined Canara Bank as a clerk on 13-10-1973 and subsequently promoted to senior manager on 20-04-1998. On 02-06-2001 petitioner was shifted to and so joined Pahar Ganj branch of the respondent bank.

3. On the basis of complaints of certain customers regarding undue favour to some customers of bank in violation to bank's rules and procedures, a FIR dated 30-06-2003 bearing No. 8(E)2003-EOW-1/DLI u/s 420/467/468/471/120-B IPC r/w 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was registered against the petitioner.

4. The petitioner in pursuant to FIR was arrested by CBI on 04.07.2003 and he was put under suspension. A charge-sheet dated 15.3.2004 was issued against petitioner for the irregularities/misconduct committed within the meaning of Regulation 3(1) read with Regulation 24 of Canara Bank Officer Employees (Conduct) Regul

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top