Disciplinary proceedings were upheld as valid; delay and procedural flaws were insufficient to overturn dismissal for misconduct.

JUDGMENT :

Ajit Kumar, J.

Late petitioner Baleshwar Prasad Sangal, an Ex-Officer of the Bank in MMGS-II, had filed this petition challenging the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority dismissing him from employment of the Bank and so also the order rejecting his appeal and review petition by the authorities of the Bank. During pendency of this petition, the petitioner died on 25.12.2003 and consequently his heirs, namely, Smt. Nisha Sangal, Anubhav Gupta and Ms. Ankita Gupta came to be substituted.

2. The original petitioner late Baleshwar Prasad Sangal was subjected to disciplinary proceedings pursuant to two set of charge-sheets dated 15.1.1996 and 18.6.1996. The first charge-sheet contained as many as seven charges and the charges were basically for the delinquent employee having failed to discharge his duties with honesty, integrity and devotion and his act and conduct was taken to be unbecoming of an official of a Bank. Besides the charges of granting credit limit of term loan without due verification, there were charges of over withdrawals, over drafting and enhancing over draft limit by exercising illegally his discretionary power. The second charge-sheet contained charges regarding misappropriation of certain amount of money meant to be deposited into the account of one Suresh Kumar Tyagi, enhancing credit limit in account of fuel and service station and brick works Company, and misplacing the original security documents in respect of two accounts. Petitioner submitted his reply on 12.9.1996 in which instead of denying charges, petitioner took an excuse of ill health as suffering from heart disease and charged co-workers of the Bank to have played foul with him in instigating higher officer to initiate disciplinary proceedings against him. The Enquiry Officer proceeded and found three charges to be partly proved, one charge to be not proved and three other charges to be fully proved. The Enquiry Officer in his ultimate finding recorded that the delinquent employee has failed to discharge his duties with honesty, integrity, devotion and diligence and acted in a manner unbecoming of a Bank official in violation of Rule 50 (4) of the State Bank of India Officers Service Rules. The inquiry report was supplied to the petitioner on 14.10.1996 and 3.9.1997 inviting his explanation and thereafter the disciplinary authorities considered the entire material placed before it and made a recommendation for dismissal of delinquent employee from service on 9.9.1998. The Competent Authority in the matter finally accepted the recommendation of the Disciplinary Authority and imposed penalty in the nature of dismissal of petitioner from service giving it effect from the date of his retirement i.e. 31.7.1996. The Appellate Authority concurred with the findings of the Disciplinary Authority and the action taken by the Competent Authority and dismissed the appeal and so also the Reviewing Authority dismissed the review petition of the petitioner.

3. Heard Ms. Anjali Gokhlani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Satish Chaturvedi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank

4. Assailing the orders impugned before this Court the argument advanced by Ms. Gokhlani is that inordinate delay in drawing disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner is itself a ground to hold the disciplinary proceedings to be bad. It is submitted that charges are relating to the period between the year 1988-89 whereas the proceedings came to be instituted only in the year 1996 when the petitioner was going to retire and this aspect absolutely established that entire action was ill motivated. Yet, second ground taken is that while petitioner was placed under suspension he was never paid subsistence allowance to which the petitioner was otherwise entitled to and therefore, this was also a reason why the petitioner could not participate in the disciplinary proceedings. It is submitted that several representations were made asking the authority to provide