IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA (CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION)

APPELLATE SIDE Present :

The Hon’ble Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee WPA 6755 of 2018 Indranath Mukherjee Vs.

United Commercial Bank (UCO Bank) & Ors.

For the petitioner : Mr. Kallol Basu, Mr. Samik Sarkar.

For the Bank : Mr. S. Pal Choudhary, Ms. Shilpi Paul.

Heard on : 16.07.2025 Judgment on : 22.07.2025 Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.:-

Preface:

1. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the legality and justifiability of the charge-sheet dated 29.08.2013, the enquiry report, the final order of punishment dated 28.09.2013 whereby the petitioner was dismissed from service, and the appellate order dated 31.12.2014 affirming the said punishment. The petitioner prays for the issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the aforementioned documents. Additionally, the petitioner prays for an appropriate order, or direction or a writ, particularly in the nature of mandamus, directing the concerned respondents to release and pay all terminal benefits lawfully due to the petitioner.

2. Before delving into the contours of the controversy, it would be prudent to first set out the essential facts that led to the filing of the present writ petition, which are as follows:

i) The petitioner joined United Commercial Bank (hereinafter referred to as "UCO Bank") on 27.03.1981 as a Clerk. Over the years, he was promoted from time to time, and was lastly posted at the Hastings Branch of the Bank on 09.06.2012. In the year

2013, he was serving as a Special Assistant at the said branch.

ii) On 29th August 2013, approximately one month prior to his scheduled date of retirement, the petitioner was served with a charge-sheet dated 29.08.2013, containing the following allegation:

“One Current Account no. 02770210000892 in the name of Global Construction was introduced by Shri Tapas Kumar Banerjee (SWO-B) using his consumer ID no. 204591744, which is of M/s. A.S. Construction. You verified the same. Due to this modification and the fact that account opening form does not contain the signature of Branch Head, the account opening form was replaced with a fresh one at a later stage. Thus, the original account opening form was removed bearing introduction of the account by Shri Tapas Kumar Banerjee (SWO-B) and signature of the Branch Head and substituted it with another account opening form being introduction by M/s A.S. Construction without signature of Branch Head.

The above allegation constitutes Gross Misconduct on your part as under: -

Doing any act prejudicial to the interest of the Bank, or gross negligence or negligence involving or likely to involve the Bank in serious loss, in terms of clause 5(j) of the Memorandum of Settlement on Disciplinary Action Procedure for Workmen signed between Indian Bank‟s Association and Workmen Unions on 10.04.2002 and circulated by the Bank vide Circular no.

CHO/PAS/07/2002 dated 21.06.2002, as amended.”

iii) In his written statement of defence, the petitioner contended that the current account of Global Construction Company was opened on 25.09.2012, shortly after he had joined the Hastings Branch. The account was opened by one Mr. Tapas Kumar Banerjee and was authorised by Mr. Sitangshu Chowdhury, a Scale-II Officer, who was then serving as the Branch Manager. The petitioner submitted that, as per bank norms, a current account can only be opened upon the introduction of an existing current account holder. In this case, the account of Global Construction Company was introduced by Mr. Tapas Banerjee, an SWO-B. The petitioner categorically denied having any role in the opening of the said account and asserted that it cannot be alleged that the opening of the account was confirmed or signed by the Senior Manager. He further stated that the account continued to operate in this manner thereafter.

iv) The petitioner further stated that, as per established procedure, the account opening form was required to be kept in the custody of the Senior Manager. Howe