SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(All) 1062

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Sudhir Agarwal, J.
Awadhesh Kumar Gupta -Appellant
Versus
Board of Directors Allahabad U.P.Gramin Bank and Others -Respondent
C.M.W.P. No. 19251 of 2003
Decided On : 21-04-2012

Advocates:
Counsel for the Petitioner: W. H. Khan, Jamal Ali , N. C. Gupta.
Counsel for the Respondents: C.S.C., S. K. Kakkar.

Sudhir Agarwal, J.—

1. Heard Sri W.H. Khan, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Jamal Ali, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri S.K. Kakkar for respondents, and perused the record.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by Sri Awadhesh Kumar Gupta, an Officer working in the erstwhile Tulsi Gramin Bank which has now become Allahabad U.P. Gramin Bank, Banda (hereinafter referred to as "Bank") being aggrieved by order dated 10.12.1997 (Annexure 11 to writ petition) whereby he has been removed from service by Chairman of the Bank/disciplinary authority and the order dated 25.11.2002 passed by Board of Directors dismissing appeal of petitioner. Petitioner has sought a writ of certiorari quashing the aforesaid two orders and further a writ of mandamus commanding respondents to reinstate him with full back wages and other consequential benefits.

3. The facts in brief, giving rise to present dispute, are as under.

4. The Bank was established under Sub-section 1 of Section 3 of Regional Rural Bank Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1976") having its Head Office at Chilla Road, Banda and is sponsored by Allahabad Bank.

5. Petitioner was appointed as an Officer on 7.1.1985 and confirmed on the said post after completion of period of probation. Petitioner was an active member of Officers' Association of Bank and at the relevant time was holding Office of General Secretary.

6. One Sri V.N. Mishra was appointed as Chairman of the Bank when petitioner was posted as Officer in the Bank's Branch at Banda. Petitioner had occasion to make complaints against the then Chairman in furtherance of his duties as an Office Bearer of Association. The complaints made by petitioner were found correct and Sri V.N. Mishra was transferred to Patna before completion of his tenure, but the act of petitioner caused and resulted a sustained ill will and animosity with Sri V.N. Mishra.

7. The Petitioner was placed under suspension on 28.4.1995 in purported exercise of power under Regulation 30 (4) of Staff Service Regulations Tulsi Gramin Bank, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as "Regulations, 1981"). The allegation against petitioner was that he used unparliamentary language during conversation with Chairman on telephone. A charge-sheet dated 28.4.1995 (Annexure 3 to writ petition) was served upon petitioner containing a single charge of abusive language. It was alleged that the aforesaid act of petitioner constitute serious misconduct under Regulation 30 (1) of Regulations, 1981. Thereafter another charge sheet was served upon petitioner on 29.4.1995 containing five charges relating to irregularities in distribution of loan between the period from the year 1988 to 1991. Since the impugned proceedings are founded on the first charge sheet only hence the subsequent one is not relevant for the present case. In fact it has not been shown whether any inquiry was actually conducted and concluded on the charges vide charge sheet dated 29.4.1995.

8. Sri Kaushlendra Shukla was appointed Inquiry Officer. It appears that petitioner had some grievance against aforesaid Inquiry Officer and made a request for change of Inquiry Officer. Consequently Sri R.P. Tiwari replaced the earlier Inquiry Officer. Petitioner again requested for change of Inquiry Officer vide letter dated 21.4.1997 but the same was rejected by Chairman vide order dated 29.4.1997. Petitioner, thereafter, came to this Court in Writ Petition No. 15157 of 1997 which was dismissed on 2.5.1997 with the observation that enquiry be proceeded expeditiously and should be completed within a period of four months. The Inquiry Officer ultimately completed enquiry and submitted report dated 17.11.1997, a copy whereof was furnished to petitioner giving opportunity to submit his representation. Thereafter the Disciplinary Authority passed order of punishment dated 10.12.1997 (Annexure 11 to writ petition) imposing punishment of removal. Petitioner preferred appeal under Regulation 33















































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top