Pankaj Mithal, J. - (1.) PETITIONER was working as a Field Officer with the U.P. Sahkari Gramya Vikas Bank Ltd. During his posting at Faizabad, he was put under suspension and a department inquiry was instituted against him for acts of misconduct and irregularities. He was submitted with a charge -sheet containing as many as 48 charges and five additional charge -sheets whereupon inquiry report was submitted by the Inquiry Officer on 18.2.2002 and most of the charges were found to be proved against him. On the basis of the inquiry report a show cause notice dated 20.3.2002 was issued by the disciplinary authority and on consideration of the reply of the petitioner thereof, petitioner was ordered to be dismissed from service vide order dated 15.10.2005 passed by the Managing Director (Annexure - 1 to the writ petition).
(2.) AT the very outset the Court inquired as to whether petitioner has a departmental remedy against the aforesaid order, whereupon counsel for the parties submitted that the services of the petitioner are governed by the U.P. Co -operative Societies Employees' Service Regulations, 1975 (In short "Regulations") and that there is no specific provision for any departmental remedy against the order of dismissal. I have perused the aforesaid regulations and find that clause (i) of Regulation 84 lays down the various punishments which can be imposed upon the employees of the bank which include the punishment of dismissal. Regulation 86 of the Regulations provides for appeal against the punishments referred in clause (a) to (d) of Regulation 84 which excludes the punishment of dismissal. As such, there is no remedy of departmental appeal against the impugned order.
(3.) I have heard Sri. R.K. Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. N.N. Jaiswal, learned counsel for the respondents.;