JUDGMENT :

Vikram D. Chauhan, J.

1. Heard Sri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Ashutosh Mishra, learned counsel for respondent-Bank

2. The writ petition is preferred by petitioners challenging the order dated 17.1.2014 passed by respondent no.4-Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Regional Business Office, Meerut and order dated 11.3.2015 passed by respondent no.3-Deputy General Manager (B&O), Administrative Office, Noida.

3. The brief facts of the case are that:

(i) An advertisement dated 8.8.2009 was issued by respondent Bank for recruitment to the post of Clerk in State Bank of India. In pursuance to said advertisement, petitioner no.1-Sachin Kumar and petitioner no.2- Sanjeev Kumar applied under general category, while petitioner no.3- Vipin Kumar applied under Schedule Caste category. In pursuance to above-mentioned advertisement, petitioners appeared in written examination. Call letters of petitioners are annexed as Annexure Nos.2A, 2B and 2C to the writ petition. The result of written examination was declared on 3.3.2010 and petitioners were declared successful in aforesaid written examination. Thereafter, petitioner no.1 appeared for interview on 1.5.2010, while petitioner no.3 appeared for interview on 27.4.2010 and petitioner no.2 also appeared for interview. Final result of above-mentioned recruitment process was declared on 29.9.2010 wherein petitioners were selected for appointment on the above-mentioned post.

(ii) In pursuance to above-mentioned selection of petitioners, petitioner no.1 submitted his joining on 18.12.2010 as Assistant in Baraut main branch, while petitioner no.2 submitted his joining at Agrawal Mandi, Tatri, District Baghpat and petitioner no.3 submitted his joining at Kotana Branch, District Baghpat. Initially, petitioners were appointed on probation for six months, however, after completion of aforesaid period, petitioners were confirmed in service.

(iii) On 9.10.2013, a notice was issued to petitioner nos. 1 and 3 to the effect that a complaint has been received with regard to fraudulent appointment in the bank. The petitioner nos.1 and 3 submitted reply denying the allegations of complaint. Petitioner nos.1 and 3 were thereafter suspended by means of order dated 16.1.2013, while petitioners no.2 was suspended by means of order dated 15.5.2012. The suspension of petitioners were based on allegation of fraudulent appointment in bank service by adopting unfair means.

(iv) Petitioner nos.1 and 3 being aggrieved by above-mentioned suspension order had preferred Writ-A No.19868 of 2013 (Sachin Kumar and 2 others Vs. S.B.I. Thru Chairman and 2 others). The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of by means of order dated 12.4.2013, whereby, this Court issued directions to the respondent-Bank that the disciplinary proceedings against petitioners be concluded preferably within three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of the order.

(v) Petitioners were issued charge-sheet dated 11.7.2013 in disciplinary proceedings. Charge against petitioners were with respect to obtaining appointment in Bank service by adopting unfair means/impersonation while attempting an examination which was held on 8.11.2009. Petitioners thereafter preferred reply to the above- mentioned charge-sheet denying allegations. Petitioners also sought for details of the complainant and copy of the complaint in respect of which disciplinary proceedings were initiated against petitioners. Petitioners also sought for cross-examination of complainant as well as the invigilator before whom petitioners appeared in written examination. Thereafter, respondents appointed an Enquiry Officer to enquire into allegations against petitioners.

(vi) Petitioners participated in disciplinary/enquiry proceedings. Thereafter, a show cause notice was issued to petitioners, which was replied by petitioners. Respondents by impugned order dated 17.1.2014 dismissed the petitioners from service. Petitioners being aggrieved by ab