S.K.SINGH,J. - (1.) BY means of this writ petition, challenge is to the orders passed by Senior Regional Manager, Kanpur Region, Punjab National Bank (respondent No. 3) dated 30 -1 -2001 (Annexure -15 to the writ petition) and the appellate order dated 31 -7 -2001 passed by Zonal Manager, East U.P. Zone, Punjab National Bank, Respondent No. 2 (Annexure -17 to the writ petition) with the prayer for re -instatement of the petitioner with all consequential benefits.
(2.) THE facts for the purposes of decision of the case runs in a narrow compass which can be summarised as thus. The petitioner having been recruited in the service of Punjab National Bank (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) in the year 1986, was selected by the Banking Services Recruitment Board for being appointed as Clerk -cum -Cashier and was posted in the District Kanpur. On 25 -4 -1998, petitioner was told by the Manager that there was some discrepancy of some amount attributable to the petitioner and the petitioner should deposit the same, upon which, the petitioner without admitting his guilt, has deposited an amount of Rs. 1,24,000 in the Bank on 25 -4 -1998 itself and an amount of Rs. 38,000 on 20 -8 -1998. On 25 -4 -1998 itself, the officiating Branch Manager passed an order of suspension. No departmental proceeding was set in motion or was contemplated and it is after about 22 months of the order of suspension, charge -sheet was served on the petitioner on 12 -2 -2000. Alongwith charge -sheet, neither any witnesses were cited nor any document in support of the charges were supplied. It is thereafter, departmental enquiry started in respect to the charge -sheet as issued on 12 -2 -2000 and by letter dated 29 -8 -2000, the petitioner was asked to attend the enquiry. The date of enquiry was fixed for 9 -9 -2000 which was deferred and thereafter, 13 -10 -2000 was fixed. On that date, it appears that the petitioner voluntarily accepted his guilt and after assuring his good and honest behaviour made a request to the disciplinary authority through the enquiry officer that his case may be decided under Para 19.12 (e) of the Bipartite Settlement. The admission by petitioner and the statement of the presenting officer in the proceeding before the enquiry officer as referred in the proceeding dated 13 -10 -2000 (Annexure -9 to the writ petition) will be useful to be referred here in below: I voluntary accept my guilt. I have deposited the money involved in the matter. For this act, I am repenting from the bottom of my heart and henceforth I assure my good and honest behaviour in discharging my duties. Since Bank has not suffered any financial loss so I want be request DA through you that my case should be decided under para 19.12 (e) of the Bipartite Settlement. I have big family to support so I further request you to kindly concede my request so that my family may not be ruined during these hard days. I hope that your good self will give me an occasion to prove my work honestly. EO to PO Do you want to say anything in the matter. PO to EO Since the employee has already accepted the charges and requested to deal his case under para 19.12 (e) of the BPS, I do not want to present the case any further.
(3.) IN view of the aforesaid admission of the petitioner, the enquiry officer with the report that the petitioner has admitted that charges concluded the enquiry and sent the matter to the disciplinary authority for considering the quantum of punishment. Thereafter on 13 -11 -2000, the petitioner was issued a show cause notice by the disciplinary authority and then on 20 -12 -2000 the petitioner was again issued a show cause notice in respect to the proposed punishment dismissal without notice. On receipt of the show cause notice with the proposed punishment of dismissal without notice, the petitioner submitted a detail reply on 20 -1 -2001 (Annexure -14 to the writ petition) in which, it was mentioned that the admission of guilt was linked with request to considering the case of the petitioner under Para 19.12 (e) of the Bipartite Settlement. It was stated that in the event, the disciplinary authority is not ready to consider and accept the petitioner's request to deal his case under Para 19.12 (e) then the departmental enquiry should proceed and after opportunity to the petitioner, decision in the matter should be taken. The representation of the petitioner dated 20 -1 -2001 could not succeed and by the order of disciplinary authority dated 30 -1 -2001 (Annexure -15 to the writ petition), petitioner was dismissed from service against which the matter having been taken by the petitioner to the appellate authority also met the same fate as the appeal was dismissed by order dated 31 -7 -2001 (Annexure -17 to the writ petition). It is these two orders referred above i.e. the dismissal of the petitioner from service and its confirmation by the appellate authority which are under challenge before this Court.;