Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
ON THE 03rd OF MARCH, 2022
WRIT PETITION No.4959 of 2015
Between:-
STATE
BANK
OF
INDIA
THROUGH
REGIONAL
MANAGER,
REGIONAL
BUSINESS OFFICE, JABALPUR.
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ASHISH SHROTI - ADVOCATE)
AND
1.
TARUN KUMAR PRADHAN SON OF SHRI
ROOPCHAND PRADHAN, AGED ABOUT 61
YEARS, RESIDENT OF BEHIND MOHAN
TALKIES, PURENA TALAB, DAMOH (M.P.)
2.
DEPUTY
GENERAL
SECRETARY,
STATE
BANK OF INDIA STAFF CONGRESS, 5/235,
PRAGATI STATE BANK COLONY, VIJAY
NAGAR, JABALPUR.
....RESPONDENTS
(BY
SHRI
PRAVEEN
YADAV
–
ADVOCATE
FOR
RESPONDENT NO.1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This petition coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble Shri
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, passed the following:
ORDER
This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is
directed against the award dated 15.10.2012 (Annexure P/15) and
W.P. No.4959 of 2015
- 2 -
award dated 16.07.2014 (Annexure P/16) passed by the Central
Government Industrial Tribunal (for short “CGIT”) in case No.
CGIT/LC- 241/1997, whereby, the order dated 06.09.1995 imposing
punishment of termination of the respondent-workman, has been set
aside and the respondent- workman has been directed to be reinstated
with continuity of service and 40% back wages.
2.
The facts of the case are that respondent/workman was appointed
in the petitioner-Bank on 01.09.1975 on the post of Clerk-cum-Cashier.
He was confirmed in service w.e.f 01.03.1976. On account of some
financial irregularities relating to withdrawal of certain amount, a
charge sheet dated 11.03.1993 (Annexure P-1) was served on the
respondent- workman, wherein, as many as 06 charges were leveled
against him. The charges are mainly related to fraudulent withdrawal
of certain amount with an object to take wrongful pecuniary advantage,
causing loss to the Bank, utilizing official position and violating the
rules- procedure applicable to the employees of the petitioner-Bank.
The respondent-workman was required to submit his reply to the
charge sheet. The respondent-workman denied all the charges vide
communication dated 25.11.1993 (Annexure P-2). Accordingly, a
departmental inquiry was directed to be conducted.
W.P. No.4959 of 2015
- 3 -
3.
Shri R.K.Jaiswal, Branch Manager, Nawgaon Branch was
appointed as the Enquiry Officer, whereas, Shri A. Shastri, Branch
Manager, City Branch, Damoh was appointed as Presenting Officer.
Five witnesses were examined in order to prove the charges against the
respondent- workman. After departmental inquiry, a report was
submitted by the Enquiry Officer to the disciplinary authority on
14.02.1995 (Annexure P-3), wherein, all the charges were found to be
proved against the respondent-workman. The disciplinary authority
after considering the material available on record was, prima facie, of
the opinion that the charges were found proved and, accordingly, an
action was required to be taken against the respondent-workman.
Pursuant to it, a show cause notice was issued to the respondent-
workman on 25.4.1995 (Annexure P-4) proposing the punishment of
dismissal from service. The disciplinary authority also provided
opportunity of personal hearing to the respondent- workman. Being
satisfied with the material available on record against the respondent-
workman, the disciplinary authority passed an order of punishment
dated 06.09.1995 (Annexure P-7), whereby, the punishment of
dismissal from service was inflicted upon the respondent-workman.
The respondent-workman preferred an appeal (Annexure P-8) which
W.P. No.4959 of 2015
- 4 -
has also been dismissed by the appellate authority vide order dated
08.11.1995 (Annexure P-9).
4.
Aggrieved by the action of the petitioner-Bank, the respo
