THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT APPEAL No.1187 of 2025

JUDGMENT:

Heard Dr. K.Lakshmi Narasimha, learned Standing Counsel for Union Bank of India, appears for the appellants and Mr. B.Chanakya, learned counsel representing Mr. P.V.Ramana, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. Upon remand in the earlier W.P.No.7402 of 2018 on the quantum of penalty to be imposed in a case of dismissal from service of the writ petitioner, the disciplinary authority passed a speaking order dated 12.04.2024 reiterating the major penalty of dismissal from Bank Service under Regulation 4(j) of the Andhra Bank Officer Employees' (Discipline & Appeal) Regulations, 1976 as earlier imposed and upheld up to the appellate stage. On being challenged again, the learned writ Court vide impugned judgment dated 08.07.2025 passed in W.P.No.12232 of 2024 has once again directed the authorities to consider the representation dated

14.02.2024 afresh and pass appropriate orders with regard to the modification of the punishment from dismissal to compulsory retirement along with consequential benefits within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. The impugned order is extracted in extenso as it is a short order:

“This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“…..to issue a Writ, Order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the orders passed by the 1^st respondent MD and CEO in RA 413:2024 dated 12.4.2024 in rejecting my representation dated 14.2.2024 for modification of the punishment from dismissal to that of compulsory retirement keeping in view of the orders passed by the High Court in W.P.No.7402 of 2018 dated 25.1.2024 and confirming the orders of dismissal passed by the disciplinary authority dated 21.8.2017 confirmed by the Appellate Authority dated 30.11.2017 as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14,16 and 21 of Constitution of India and contrary to the orders passed by the High Court in W.P.No.7402 of 2018 dated 25.1.2024 consequently declare that the petitioner is entitled for modification of the punishment orders from dismissal to that of compulsory retirement and entitled to receive all pension and retirement benefits from the date of superannuation with all consequential attendant benefits in the interests of justice and to pass….”

2. Heard Sri P.V.Ramana, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Dr. K. Lakshmi Narasimha, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court challenging his dismissal order, dated 30.11.2017 passed by respondent No.2 by filing a W.P.No.7402 of 2018. After hearing both sides, vide order, dated 25.01.2024, this Hon’ble Court passed the following order:

“Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to make a fresh representation before the respondent authorities for modification of the punishment from dismissal from service to that of compulsory retirement in terms of Regulation 4(h) of the Andhra Bank Officer Employees’ (Dismissal & Appeal) Regulations, 1976 within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of the same, the respondent bank authorities are directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of eight (08) weeks thereafter”.

4. After hearing both sides and observing the merits of the case, this Court had passed the above order and directed the petitioner to make a fresh representation. Subsequently in compliance with the said order, the petitioner made a representation before the authorities. However, the authorities without properly understanding the order passed by this Court, once again simply rejected the same on the very same aspect. The intention of this Court was that after hearing both sides,