Hon’ble Suneet Kumar, J.—Heard Sri Sharad Malviya assisted by Sri A.N. Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri T.P. Singh, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri V.K. Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. The petitioner was working as Computer Terminal Operator (CTO) in Laxman Patti Branch of UCO Bank at Bhadohi, for committing irregularities was placed under suspension, a charge-sheet containing seven charges was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted reply to the charge-sheet on 12.9.2006 denying the allegations, hence, an Enquiry Officer was appointed who after conducting the enquiry recorded a finding on 18.2.2009 that charge Nos. 2 and 5 are proved and charge Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6 and 7 are not proved against the petitioner.

3. The Disciplinary Authority disagreed with the findings of the Enquiry Officer in respect of charge Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6 and 7, but agreed with the finds in respect of charge Nos. 2 and 5 vide order dated 31.3.2008 and issued notice calling upon the petitioner to show-cause. The petitioner submitted his reply on 9.4.2008 to the Disciplinary Authority pertaining to the charge Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6 and 7. The Discip