By the Court.—Heard Sri S.N.Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.K.Kakkar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the orders dated 26.11.2007, annexure-5 to the writ petition, order dated 20.11.2008, annexure-9 to the writ petition, order dated 7.1.2009, annexure-10 to the writ petition and further order dated 25.4.2009 passed by the reviewing authority. By the order dated 26.11.2007, the petitioner has been awarded major penalty of compulsory retirement in terms of Regulation 4(h) of Punjab National Bank Officers and Employees’ (Discipline and Appeal) Regulation, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as “Regulation, 1977”). The order of punishment has been confirmed in appeal and by the reviewing authority.

3. The enquiry proceeding has been initiated in respect of the various charges when the petitioner was posted as Branch Manager, Gonda. The first charge-sheet was submitted on 5.2.2007 and the second charge-sheet was submitted on 14.8.2007. In the first charge-sheet two charges have been levelled, which are as follows:

“Charge No. 1.—He indulged in violation of bank/Government guidelines and did not conduct proper pre-sanction appraisal while sanctioning loans to various borrowers and failed to conduct proper post sanction follow up/control in the same, as a result banks’ funds and interest have been put to jeopardy and outstanding in the loan accounts if proving difficult of recovery.

Charge No. 2.—He did not ensure lodgment and safe upkeep of cheques submitted by customers for collection and made/passed various unauthorised transactions to conceal the same, as a result banks’ interest has been put to jeopardy and it may suffer a financial loss.

4. In the second charge-sheet three charges have been levelled, which are as follows:

Charge No. 3.—He misused his official position and sanctioned/disbursed credit facilities to large number of borrowers ignoring the fact that the Senior Regional Manager suspended his loaning powers.

Charge No. 4.—He sanctioned/disbursed credit facilities in favour of various borrowers without proper pre-sanction appraisal and failed to exercise effective post sanction follow-up/control in the same, as a result security in various loan accounts has been found to be depleted/missing and outstanding is proving difficult of recovery.

Charge No. 5.—He put banks’ interest to jeopardy by not ensuring compliance of laid down guidelines in day to day working of the branch viz adjustment of ODD entries, incurred expenses beyond his vested powers, timely balancing of important heads and non conduction of morning checking in as much as to conceal the facts he did not seek confirmation of excess expenditure made and submitted false MMC.”

5. In the aforesaid charge-sheets on the basis of charges, it was alleged that the petitioner failed to discharge his duties with utmost integrity, devotion and diligence, which constitute misconduct in terms of Regular 3(1) read with Regulation 24 of Regulation, 1977. The petitioner filed the reply to the aforesaid charge-sheets.

6. In the reply, in sum and substance, the petitioner has submitted that on the verbal instructions of Senior Regional Manager, Faizabad the loans have been sanctioned. He admitted that there was procedural lapses on his part and due to shortage of staff, the postings have not been done within the stipulated time. The enquiry officer submitted the enquiry report on 25.10.2007 to the disciplinary authority and found all the charges proved. In respect of all the charges, the following findings have been recorded :

FINDINGS ON ARTICLE I

On the basis of evidences brought on the records of Enquiry and the arguments put forth by PO and CO as detailed by me herein before it is established that CO indulged in violation of bank/Government guidelines and did not conduct proper pre-sanction appraisal by sanctioning loans to various borrowers and failed to