IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-3119-2026 (O&M)

Date of decision: 04.02.2026 Gourav Dhawal ... Petitioner Vs.

Punjab Gramin Bank and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Mohan Singla, Advocate for the petitioner.

*******

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)

1. Present civil writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari seeking quashing of the dismissal order dated 25.06.2025 (Annexure P-9), chargesheet dated 20.06.2024 (Annexure P-1), enquiry report dated 28.02.2025 (Annexure P-5) and entire disciplinary proceedings initiated during pendency of a criminal case, with a further prayer to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service and grant full back wages with continuity of service along with all other benefits.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was a confirmed permanent Customer Service Associate (Office Assistant) in the respondent-Bank. On 20.06.2024, a chargesheet (Annexure P-1) was served upon him alleging misconduct under Article IV(a), to which, he submitted a detailed reply on 15.07.2024 (Annexure P-2) and requested to provide 319 documents (listed as MD-1 to MD-319) along with a list of witnesses. It is further contended that with the similar allegations, an FIR No.105 dated 21.06.2024 was registered under Sections 420, 465, 467 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, at Police Station Dharamkot, District Moga (Annexure P-3). Further, the Enquiry Officer submitted a report dated 28.02.2025 (Annexure P-5) proving the charges against the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation dated 17.04.2025 (Annexure P-6) against the findings of Enquiry Officer, which was not decided. However, a Show Cause Notice dated 04.06.2025 (Annexure P-7), proposing to impose major penalty of dismissal from service, was issued to the petitioner and on 25.06.2025, impugned order (Annexure P-9) was passed without affording adequate opportunity to him to respond to the aforesaid Show Cause Notice. Further, impugned order of dismissal (Annexure P-9) was passed within 24 hours of grant of personal hearing without independent application of mind. As such, entire disciplinary proceedings suffers from incurable illegality on account of failure of the Enquiry Officer to grant sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to lead defence evidence. The enquiry was concluded during pendency of the criminal case arising out of identical facts and witnesses, causing grave prejudice to the petitioner. Furthermore, treating the suspension period as non-duty period is not sustainable in the eyes of law.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record of the case file with his able assistance.

4. Admittedly, the petitioner filed his reply (Annexure P-2) to the chargesheet dated 20.06.2024 (Annexure P-1) on 15.07.2024 and he also sought time to file reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 04.06.2025 (Annexure P-7), as discernible from letter dated 24.06.2025 (Annexure P-8). The petitioner also requested to supply copies of 319 documents along with a list of witnesses, which, in the considered opinion of this Court, appears to be a ploy to delay the disciplinary proceedings. Further, the petitioner was issued chargesheet dated 20.06.2024 (Annexure P-1) for indulging in unethical and dishonest activities by allegedly transferring accounts from ‘inoperative category’ to ‘operative category’ without obtaining request form/consent documents or updation of KYC documents of account-holders. The signatures of 14 account-holders on the withdrawal slips do not match with signatures on Account Opening Forms and also thumb impression of 02 account-holders do not match with the record maintained in the respondent-Bank. Further, amounts were withdrawn from the accounts of 09 deceased account-holders and there are 67 accounts, fro