Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J
Petitioner – Appellant
Versus
State Bank of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dismissal based on travel allowance irregularities (Para 1) |
| 2. adequate opportunities provided for the inquiry (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. failure to engage voids claims of unfairness (Para 7 , 9) |
ORDER:
The petitioner joined the State Bank of Hyderabad as a Clerk-cum-
Cashier on 05.12.1980 and was subsequently promoted to officer cadre, and served as Manager (Inspection - Mobile) from May 2013 to October 2014. As per duty, he conducted audits across several branches. He was placed under suspension on 27.10.2014 for alleged irregularities in TA (Travel Allowance) claims, and a charge memo dated 11.05.2015 was issued with three charges: improper audit practices and wrongful TA claims of ₹3,22,361.Despite submitting his explanations, a disciplinary inquiry was initiated. Several procedural issues occurred during the inquiry: the petitioner was not allowed to cross-examine key witnesses, was denied access to relevant documents, and was set ex parte on 18.02.2016 while hospitalized. Multiple representations requesting rescheduling of the inquiry and access to documents were denied.Subsequently, the petitioner was dismissed from service on 24.06.2016. He challenged the
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
