IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN WRIT PETITION No. 11119 of 2025 ZONAL MANAGER Versus SHRI HANSRAJ Appearance:

Shri Anoop Nair, Senior Advocate with Ms. Akashmi Trivedi- Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Girish Patwardhan, Senior Advocate with Ms. Ritika Jhawar Advocate for the respondents.

ORDER (Reserved on : 16/09/2025) (Pronounced on: 23/09/2025)

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner-Bank challenging the award passed by the CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur (for short referred to as “Tribunal”) dated 23.07.2024 whereby the punishment of dismissal awarded to the respondent-workman dated 25.02.2024 has been held to be unjustified and the respondent-workman has been held entitled to be reinstated in service with all backwages and other benefits admissible to him from the date of his suspension till date of his superannuation by deeming him to be in continuous service. He is further held entitled to all post-retiral benefits as he had crossed the age of his superannuation on the date of award. The Tribunal further granted an interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of award if amount is not paid within 30 days from the date of publication of award.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner-Bank has vehemently argued before this Court that the Tribunal has gravely erred in transgressing its jurisdiction and scrutinizing the evidence adduced during the course of Departmental Enquiry as an appellate court, and not confining itself to the settled limits of judicial review vested in the Industrial Tribunals. It is argued that once the disciplinary authority had reached to a conclusion that the charges against the petitioner of major misconduct were duly proved during course of inquiry, then there was in fact no occasion for the tribunal to have interfered in the matter and have made its own assessment of evidence available on record, and to have held that there is no legal evidence against the petitioner during course of the inquiry, and to have directed reinstatement of the respondent workman.

3. By elaborating the submissions, the counsel for the petitioner bank has submitted that the respondents was given the work of preparing transfer payment orders (TPOs for short) while working at Ravindranath Tagore Marg (RNT Marg) branch, Indore of the then Oriental Bank of Commerce, (now merged in Punjab National Bank). It was alleged that in the month of June-July in the year 1998, he handed over 10 blank leaves of TPOs by taking out the same from the bank and handed over to certain unnamed outsiders, which resulted in fraud/attempted fraud against the bank and 6 PPOs were paid /presented at different branches of the Bank at Mumbai and Bhopal amounting to Rs 22,58,220/- in the year 1988, during months of July to September.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR

4. It is argued another employee Shri Babulal Pandya (WX-1 in DE) was regularly preparing TPOs in the Bank and during rush period, the petitioner also used to be assigned the work of preparation of TPOs. The petitioner by misusing the trust reposed in him by the bank in assigning the duty of preparation of TPOs to the petitioner, stole 10 blank leaves out of which 6 were misused. It is further argued that as per document Exhibit 3, placed on record in the enquiry proceedings, the petitioner when confronted by the then Branch Manager Shri S. K. Arora, admitted that he was threatened by some outsiders who took him on gunpoint and they used to ask the petitioner to bring out blank leaves of TPOs and also to teach them how to prepare the TPOs and at the threatening given by such unnamed persons, he took out 10 blank leaves of TPOs from time to time. The said admission letter (Exhibit 3 in Enquiry proceedings) dated 18th March 1988 was duly signed by the respondent workman. In the same breath, another document Exhibit 4 was also prepared by the respondent workman in continuation with hi