ORDER

State Bank of India is in appeal against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in LPA No. 358/1996. By the said judgment, the Division Bench has affirmed the decision of the learned Single Judge and refused to interfere with the same. It is not necessary to narrate the facts in detail. Suffice it to say that an enquiry was conducted against the delinquent, an officer of the Bank in respect of charges 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d) and charges 2 and 3. On the basis of the materials produced, the enquiring officer came to the conclusion that charge 1(c) is fully proved but so far as other charges are concerned, it came to the conclusion that charges have been partly proved. On receipt of the findings of the enquiring officer, the disciplinary authority re-examined the materials and did not agree with the conclusion of the enquiring officer on charges 1(a), 1(b), 1(d), 2 and 3. The disciplinary authority, on the other hand, came to the conclusion that the charges 1(a), 1(b) and 1(d) must be held to have been fully proved, and taking into account the gravity of the charges, the disciplinary authority recommended the case to the appointing authority for inflic