SONALI BANK LIMITED Vs. MD. ABDUL AZIZ
SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH
Sonali Bank Limited
Md. Abdul Aziz
Click here to view full judgement.
SHAH ABU NAYEEM MOMINUR RAHMAN, J. -
(1.) This application for leave to appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 17.06.2008 passed in Appeal No.13 of 2002 by the Administrative Appellate Tribunal, Dhaka, dismissing the appeal affirming the judgment and order dated 26.01.2002 passed in Administrative Tribunal Case No.91 of 1997 by the Administrative Tribunal, Dhaka.
(2.) Facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of the leave petition are that the respondent hereof was appointed as a Probationer Officer of the petitioner-Sonali Bank on 02.02.1986 and his service was confirmed with effect from 18.12.1988 in view of his satisfactory service rendered and he was also awarded monitory benefit while he was serving in Dighinala Branch at Khagrachori and that he was charge sheeted for misappropriation of money on the basis of preliminary inquiry and accordingly he was asked to show cause under Regulation No. 28 of the Sonali Bank (Employees) Regulations, 1981 vide memo dated 31.01.1995, naming the inquiry officer in the said show cause notice, and thereafter the inquiry was held ex-parte without providing any opportunity to the respondent hereof to defend himself and to adduce witness and a report was submitted on 08.08.1995 and he being found guilty of the alleged misappropriation he was served with a second show cause notice : dated 20.11.1995 under the provisions of Regulation No. 28 (1) (b) of the said Regulations, 1981, mentioning that preliminary decision was taken for his dismissal from service as punishment, to which the respondent replied on 07.12.1995 but the said reply having been found to be not satisfactory, the respondent was dismissed from service vide Memo dated 18.06.1996 and that the respondent submitted an appeal dated 30.06.1996 for his reinstatement exonerating him from the charges, which was found to be not acceptable and the Bank authority upheld the decision of dismissal of the respondent from service and communicated the decision vide Memo dated 07.12.1996.
(3.) Thereafter the respondent filed Administrative Tribunal, Case No. 91 of 1997 before the Administrative Tribunal, Dhaka, under Section-4 (2) of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1980, which, on contest, was allowed declaring that the orders of dismissal as well as rejection of the appeal for reinstatement are illegal, void, without jurisdiction and of no legal effect and further direction was given for reinstatement of the respondent in his service with all arrear salary and other allowances as admissible under the law. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with said judgment and order the Sonali Bank, as appellant, preferred A. A. T. Appeal No.13 of 2002 under Section 6 (2) of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1980 before the Administrative Appellate Tribunal, Dhaka, which was heard and disposed of on contest by the impugned judgment and order dated 17.06.2008 dismissing the appeal and upholding the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal below observing, amongst others, that the inquiry officer was no appointed as per the provisions of Regulation No. 28 (13) of the Sonali Bank (Employees) Service Regulations, 1981 and there was violation of provisions of Regulations 11 and 13 of said Regulations, 1981, which according to the Appellate Tribunal are mandatory, and thus arrived at its decision for dismissing the appeal and that being aggrieved by said decision of the Appellate Tribunal the instant leave petition has been filed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.