K.CHANDRU
D. Thomas Franco Rajendra Dev – Appellant
Versus
Disciplinary Authority and Circle Development Officer, State Bank of India – Respondent
1. The two petitioners have filed these two writ petitions challenging the order of the first respondent, who is the disciplinary authority and Circle Development Officer, State Bank of India, Chennai, dated 27.09.2012 and seeks to set aside the same.
2. By the impugned notice, dated 27.09.2012, the two petitioners were informed that in terms of Rule 68(l)(i) of State Bank of India Officers' Service Rules, it was decided by the appropriate authority to institute disciplinary proceedings against them. Accordingly, they were forwarded three annexures containing Articles of charge as Annexure-I, statement of imputation of misconduct in support of the articles of charge as Annexure-II and the list of documents and witnesses in support of articles of charge as Annexure-III. The petitioners were directed to give their statement of defence if any within 15 days. In the imputation of misconduct in Annexure-II, it was stated that the petitioners on 28.08.2012 had instigated officers of the Bank to hold demonstrations within the bank's premises/ compound at the local head office, Chennai. They also shouted slogans. The petitioners themselves have participated in these demonstrations
5. Special Director v. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse reported in (2004) 3 SCC 440.
7. Bihar State Housing Board v. Ramesh Kumar Singh (1996) 1 SCC 327.
Special Director v. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse (2004) 3 SCC 440.
State of U.P. v. Brahm Datt Sharma(1987) 2 SCC 179.
Kameshwar Prasad Vs. State of Bihar reported in AIR 1962 SC 1166.
State of U.P. v. Brahm Datt Sharma reported in (1987) 2 SCC 179.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.