1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

WRIT PETITION No.47420/2015(L-RES)

BETWEEN

UNION BANK OF INDIA

ZONAL OFFICE

CHANDRAKIRAN BUILDING,

NO.10, KASTURBA ROAD,

BENGALURU – 560 001

REPREENTED BY ITS

CHIEF MANAGER-HR,

SRI.K.S.VENKATESH.

.. PETITIONER

(BY SRI.SOMASHEKAR, ADVOCATE (VIDEO

CONFERENCING))

AND

SRI.K.SATISHCHANDRA SHETTY

MAJOR,

KAMALA NIVAS,

MAJILE COLONY,

JAPPUR SEMINARY,

MANGALURU – 575 002.

... RESPONDENT

(BY SMT.SHEELA KRISHNA, ADVOCATE (VIDEO

CONFERENCING))

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES

226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING

TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 19.1.2007 VIDE ANN-V

2

PASSED BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE.

THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR

ORDERS

ON

17.11.2020

COMING

ON

FOR

PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioner – Union Bank of India (hereinafter

referred to as ‘the Bank’ for short) has called in

question the order and award of the Central

Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court

passed

in

Central

Reference

No.4/2004

dated

19.01.2007 and 18.2.2015 respectively, whereby the

Tribunal allowed the reference, set aside the order of

the Bank dismissing the respondent from service and

directing reinstatement with full backwages.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties

herein are referred to as ‘the Bank’ (petitioner) and

‘the Workman’ (respondent).

3

3. Brief facts of the case leading to filing of the

present writ petition as pleaded are that:

The workman was appointed as a sub-staff with

effect from 01.02.1979 and was posted to work at

Mangaluru main branch. On 10.02.1998, one

customer by name, Mumtaz Yuna Kunhi Monu visited

the branch to remit Rs.500/- to his S.B.Account and

tendered passbook for updating. On that particular

day, the workman was not on duty. The ledger

keeper at the branch compared passbook entries of

the customer with that of the ledger entries in the

Bank and found that there were 112 entries in the

passbook of the customer, but only 13 entries in the

ledger maintained in the Bank of the account of the

said customer.

4. The account holder also showed a deposit

receipt

of

Rs.22,000/-

on

17.11.1997

and

on

4

verification it was found there were no corresponding

entries in the Bank’s ledger or deposit receipt. All the

said 112 entries were in the handwriting of the

workman. The deposit receipt also was in the

handwriting of the workman. When the customer

came to know about the fact that huge sums of

deposits had gone missing, lodged a written complaint

on the same day enclosing the deposit receipt and the

passbook of the S.B. Account bearing No.6160.

5. The complaint clearly narrated that the

account was opened on an introduction of the

workman and the customer used to hand over cash to

the workman at his residence to credit it to the

S.B.Account and the workman was making entries in

the passbook in his own handwriting and giving it

back. Same was with the fixed deposit receipt of

Rs.22,000/-.

5

6. Making a mention of the said instances, the

customer sought refund of the amount mentioned in

the passbook, as also, the fixed deposit in terms of

the receipt. When the workman resumed duties on

14.02.1998, the Bank enquired about the said

discrepancies, upon which, the workman admitted the

guilt by giving a letter dated 14.02.1998 that he had

removed three fixed deposit receipts which had

resulted in shortage of amounts and a discrepancy

between the customer passbook and Bank’s ledger.

7. On the said misconduct, a charge sheet was

issued on 19.03.1998 against the workman and the

Disciplinary Authority conducted enquiry as Enquiry

Officer. Again in the enq