RAJENDRA KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA Vs. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER
LAWS(CHH)-2003-9-7
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Decided on September 26,2003

RAJENDRA KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA Appellant
VERSUS
CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS VS. T.J. PAUL,KOCHI [REFERRED TO]
G.A. SARMA VS. THE CHAIRMAN SYNDICATE BANK AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
B C CHATURVEDI UNION OF INDIA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. B K MEENA [REFERRED TO]
BALBIR CHAND VS. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
R S SAINI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK VS. P C KAKKAR [REFERRED TO]
LALIT POPLI VS. CANARA BANK [REFERRED TO]
KAILASH NATH GUPTA VS. ENQUIRY OFFICER R K RAI ALLAHABAD BANK [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)BY this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has questioned the legality, validity and propriety of the impugned order of dismissal dated 13-5-97 received by the petitioner on 25-5-97 and the appellate order dated 5-11 -97 received on 19-11 -97.
(2.)FACTS leading to filling of this writ petition are that the petitioner joined State Bank of India as Clerk on 10-10-67 through competitive examination thereafter in the year 1976 he was promoted as Officer Junior Management and as MMGS-II in August 1988. The petitioner was posted as Branch Manager of Janjgir branch from 15-12-88 to 31 -5-1990, during this period for committing certain irregularities in sanction, disbursement and follow up of advances, the petitioner was served with a charge sheet (Annexure-P/2) dated 3-1-1994 received on 14-1 -1994. The charges were mainly classified as 11 in number but in the statement of allegations in all such irregularities were mentioned as 41. The petitioner submitted a detailed reply to the charge sheet on 11-3-1994. The disciplinary authority decided to hold the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner in terms of Rule 68(1)(i) of the State Bank of India (Supervisory Staff) Service Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules').
The enquiry was conducted by the Enquiry Officer and the same was completed on 17-10-95 and after completing the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted his finding that all the charges were proved against the petitioner.

(3.)THE petitioner made a detailed representation against the findings of the Enquiry Officer on 30-9-96, but the disciplinary/appointing authority agreed with the findings of the Enquiry Officer and ultimately imposed the penalty of dismissal from service on 13-5-1997 (Annexure-P/7) against which the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority i.e. The Chief General Manager. The Appellate Authority also dismissed the appeal vide order dated 20-10-97 communicated to the petitioner vide order dated 5-11 -97.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.