JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. S. Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Ganguly, learned counsel for the respondent, Punjab National Bank.

2. The petitioner who was serving as a Junior Management Grade Scale I, was served with a charge sheet dated 30.5.2012, inter alia, alleging that while conducting his duties, the petitioner had not followed the prescribed guidelines and have also acted in a manner which has caused a financial loss to the Bank as well as there is a loss of faith on the petitioner.

3. The charges were that the petitioner did not discharge his duties with utmost integrity, honesty, devotion and diligence and also committed misconduct. Article 1 of the charges alleges that the petitioner had fraudulently debited the suspense account against pension. Allegations were also made that the petitioner had submitted a scroll amount which was in excess of the actual amount of pension that were paid to the pensioner and that the petitioner had unauthorisedly debited various accounts of the customers and had withdrawn amounts for his personal gain. A further charge was that the accounts were not properly maintained and there were clear indications that the petitioner had manipulated the same in a manner which would give him personal gain, at the expenses of the depositor's money.

4. All the charges against the petitioner are stated to be serious enough to make the Bank to lose its confidence on integrity of the petitioner. But, at the same time, all the charges would also have to be proved by the departmental authorities by substantiating it on the basis of the records. In the process, the manner in which the enquiry was conducted would be most relevant and the delinquent employee must be given every opportunity to know in detail as to what are the allegations of misconduct against him and should also be allowed to inspect such documents so as to enable him to give his reply.

5. Mr. S. Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner firstly states that along with the charge sheet, no list of documents and list of witnesses were provided to the petitioner. Accordingly reference had been made to the provisions of regulation 6(3) of the Punjab National Bank's Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1977, which, inter alia, requires that along with the charge sheet, a list of document to be relied upon along with its copies and also a list of witnesses along with the copies of the statement of witnesses, if any, are to be served on the delinquent. When the charge sheet annexed to the writ petition as Annexure 4 is examined, it is noticed that the said charge sheet neither contains any list of documents and the copies thereof nor it contains a list of witnesses with copies of their statements, which otherwise the delinquent petitioner is entitled. Further ground has also been taken by the petitioner that the entire enquiry was conducted within a period of 2 days and the required procedure prescribed under the clauses 6(11) to 6(21) of the aforesaid Regulations have not been followed. It is noticed that clauses 6(11) to 6(21) of the Regulations provide for an elaborate procedure and steps that are to be followed while conducting the enquiry.

6. Some of the relevant and pertinent provisions of the procedure are that on the date fixed for the enquiry, the presenting officer shall be examined and he may also be cross-examined by the concerned delinquent employee. Sub-clause (14) of the clause 6 also provides that the enquiry authority may allow the presenting officer to produce evidence not included in the charge sheet but in such case, the concerned delinquent employee shall be given an opportunity to inspect such documents before it be taken on record and the enquiry authority shall also allow the delinquent employee to produce any new evidence if it is necessary in the interest of justice. Further, after allowing the departmental authorities to present their case, the delinquent would be allowed to state his defence o