The court emphasized that it would not sit in appeal over the findings of the Departmental Authority and would not re-appreciate the evidence which has come before the Departmental Authority. The court held that the punishment as imposed by the Disciplinary Authority did not warrant interference.

JUDGMENT

[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing]

Mini Pushkarna, J. (Oral)--At the outset, attention of this Court has been drawn to the notification dated 04.03.2020 by which the Syndicate Bank has been amalgamated into Canara Bank. Thus, on oral request of learned counsel for the petitioner, Canara Bank is impleaded as respondent, instead of Syndicate Bank.

2. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 08.02.2013 passed by the Appellate Authority, whereby the Appellate Authority while setting aside the punishment of dismissal, has imposed penalty of compulsory retirement upon the petitioner herein. The petitioner also seeks quashing of the order of the Reviewing Authority dated 26.11.2013, by which the order of the Appellate Authority was confirmed. There is further prayer for quashing the penalty order dated 27.07.2011 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and for exonerating the petitioner, along with re-instatement in service and releasing all financial and service benefits.

3. At the relevant point of time, the petitioner was posted as Assistant General Manager, Syndicate Bank, and was head of the East Patel Nagar Branch, Delhi. Between 13.02.2009 to 27.11.2009, the petitioner sanctioned/released credit facility in the form of Advance Against Bills for Collection (AABC) amounting to Rs.130,00,000/- to M/s Malik Gold House Private Limited.

4. The petitioner received a letter of his suspension from service on 27.11.2009, on the ground of violation of bank's guidelines in granting AABCs amounting to Rs.130,00,000/- to M/s Malik Gold House Private Limited. A charge sheet with regard to the same was also sent to the petitioner on 26.06.2010, wherein it was stated that the petitioner by violating the bank's guidelines, had exposed the bank to financial loss to the tune of Rs.147.30 lakhs.

5. With regard to the aforesaid allegations, an Inquiry Officer was appointed. Regular inquiry was conducted. The Inquiring Authority submitted its report to the Disciplinary Authority on 21.03.2011. Copy of the Inquiry report was served upon the petitioner seeking his comments. Pursuant thereto, petitioner submitted a detailed representation dated 09.05.2011.

6. The Disciplinary Authority vide order dated 27.07.2011, dismissed the petitioner from service. Against the aforesaid order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority vide order dated 08.02.2013, set aside the order of dismissal, but directed imposition of major penalty of compulsory retirement on the petitioner. The Review Petition preferred by the petitioner against the order of the Appellate Authority was dismissed vide order dated 26.11.2013. Thus, against the aforesaid order dated 26.11.2013 passed by the Reviewing Authority; order dated 08.02.2013 passed by the Appellate Authority and order dated 27.07.2011 passed by the Disciplinary Authority, the present writ petition has come to be filed.

7. It is the contention on behalf of the petitioner that no violations were committed by him while sanctioning AABCs to M/s Malik Gold House Private Limited. It is submitted that a specifically trained officer in Foreign Exchange business (FX) in the rank of Senior Manager (FX) by the name of Sh. Gurudev Singh, was posted at East Patel Nagar Branch by the Bank, to deal with and process credit proposals connected with international trade transactions. The said official was to guide and advise the Branch Head i.e. the petitioner herein with recommendations in the matter of sanction and disbursement of loans pertaining to International Business including that of finance against Export Bills etc.

8. It is submitted that in his capacity as the head of FX business section in the branch, the said Sh. Gurudev Singh processed and recommended for sanction of AABCs to M/s Malik Gold House Private Limited. The respondent bank found serious lapses on the part of Sh. Gurudev Singh in recommending the proposal and he was issued with a cha