JUDGMENT

A. K. SAMANTARAY, J. — In this writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner has chal¬lenged the order of discharge from service passed by the Disci¬plinary Authority (O.P. No.1) and confirmation of the same by the Appellate Authority (O.P. No.3) and has prayed for quashment of the said orders under Annexures 25 & 28. She has also prayed for her reinstatement in service with all service benefits right from the date of her suspension on 1.2.1997.

2. The background facts leading to the discharge of the petitioner from service and filing of this writ petition is narrated below.

The petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant in the State Bank of India and her appointment was made on compassionate ground on 9.2.1985. In the first instance she was posted as a Clerk in the IDCO Tower Branch of the State Bank of India at Bhubaneswar and in May, 1992 she was transferred to Balasore. While holding office in the SBI, Main Branch, Balasore, she committed serious irregularities and gross misconduct in the month of January, 1997. The petitioner belongs to award staff and is governed by All India Industrial Tribunal (Bank Disputes) which is popularly known as Shastry Award and paragraph 512 of the Shastry Award prescribes the procedure relating to the disci¬plinary proceedings and imposition of penalty and the said Shas¬try Award is binding on the parties in accordance with Section 18 of the Industrial Dispute Act. The serious irregularities and gross misconduct came to light and the petitioner was placed under suspension by order dated 1.2.1997 vide Annexure-4. There¬after, by order dated 1.7.1997 (Annexure-5) she was called upon to submit her explanation to the allegation that she had decep¬tively managed to obtain three numbers of SB withdrawals from Smt. Satyabati Das for Rs.95,000/-, Rs.75,000/- and Rs.73,000/- aggregating to Rs.2,43,000/- drawn on her S.B. Account No.55/211 and presented them for payment with an ulterior motive knowing fully well that the balance in the account was insufficient on the material date i.e. 22.1.1997. She was also called upon to explain the allegation that she had deceptively removed the rela¬tive S.B. Ledger sheet of the Account and three paid withdrawals in question purposefully with an intention to destroy the evi¬dence and defraud the Bank. She was also called upon to explain about her unauthorizedly leaving the Branch after receiving payment of Rs.2,43,000/- on 22.1.1997 without obtaining prior permission from the appropriate authority and remaining absent since then from duty in an unauthorized manner without submitting any leave application, in violation of the rules of service conditions under which she was governed. She was further called upon to explain in the said Annexure-5 to the allegation that on the same day she had deposited Rs.20,065/- towards liquidation of her cooperative loan account from out of the amount drawn by her practising fraud.

3. The petitioner on receipt of Annexure-5 submitted her show cause on 1.12.1997 vide Annexure-6. denying the alleged act of misconduct and irregularities levelled against her. Since the explanation furnished by her was not satisfactory and in fact the same was not a true reflection of the state of affairs a disci¬plinary proceeding was initiated and chargesheet was issued detailing the charges levelled against her vide Annexure-7 asking the petitioner to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against her and Enquiry Officer, namely, Anirudha Patt¬naik was appointed and one Sri B. B. Parida was appointed as the Presenting Officer vide Annexure-8 dated 23.3.1998. On 7.4.1998 vide Annexure-9 Sri R. K. Ghose, MMGS-III, Manager (NPA), Region-III, State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Bhubaneswar was appointed as the Enquiry Officer in place of Sri Anirudha Pattnaik to conduct the inquiry and the same was intimated to the petitioner. On 7.4.1998 the petitioner submitted her show cause vide Annex¬ur