SOM NATH MANOCHA Vs. PUNJAB & SIND BANK (DELHI)
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Som Nath Manocha
Punjab And Sind Bank (Delhi)
Click here to view full judgement.
REKHA SHARMA,J. -
(1.) The petitioner - Som Nath Manocha, joined as a clerk in Punjab and Sind Bank and retired from there on 31st May, 2006 as Scale-II Officer. On the eve of his retirement, i.e., on 12th April, 2006, a charge sheet was slapped on him. It pertained to his conduct whereby he stood guarantor in respect of four loans sanctioned by the Bank in favour of J.P. Manocha, General Tyres House, Tyre Emporium and Olympic Tyres & Tubes. Although the memorandum of charge-sheet, the articles of charge and the statement of allegations do not refer to the dates when these loans were sanctioned but, it is not in dispute that these loans were sanctioned between the year 1980-81. It is also not in dispute that two of the loan amounts have since been settled and in respect of two others, Civil Suits were filed by the Bank way back in the year 1984-85. Those suits are still pending.
(2.) The allegation against the petitioner is that being a Bank employee, he could not stand guarantor for any person or entity to enable such person or entity to secure loans without prior permission of the competent authority. Admittedly, the petitioner obtained no such prior permission.
(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that since 1980-81 or at least from 1984-85, when the Bank had filed civil suits, it was in the know of the fact that he had stood guarantor for the aforementioned parties yet it took no action against him and slept over the matter for as long as quarter of a century. It was only on April 12, 2006 that the Bank woke up from its slumber and served the charge-sheet on him when he was about to retire within about a month thereafter.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.