- (1.) The petitioner, who at the relevant point of time was posted as a Branch Manager of the Central Bank of India, Phawara, Agra Branch, has filed the present writ petition, challenging the orders passed against him dated 31.1.2008, 4.1.2010 and 19.7.2010, whereby he has been compulsorily retired. The disciplinary authority by the order dated 31.1.2008, contained in annexure-11 to the writ petition, found the charges levelled against the petitioner proved in the disciplinary proceedings and consequently, awarded dismissal from service. The appellate authority by the order dated 4.1.2010 affirmed the punishment imposed. The reviewing authority, however, vide its order dated 19.7.2010 found that there was nothing on record to substantiate the primary allegation of connivance levelled against the petitioner and only the charge of negligence was found proved against the petitioner, consequently, the punishment of dismissal was modified by imposing the punishment of compulsory retirement under the relevant service regulations, relevant portion whereof is reproduced:- "On carefully examining the material at the outset undersigned concur with the finding of Appellate Authority that CSOE was gross negligent in performing his duty. CSOE being the joint custodian of the cash was required to be and supposed to be equally careful and vigilant particularly when he is Manager in the Branch. Had he been taken due and proper care in ensuring the correctness of the cash before the closure, Mr. S.P. Sharma would not have an opportunity to take out the cash from the branch. In fact CSOE's carelessness facilitated Sh. Sharma to take away the cash from the Branch. I am, therefore, of the view that CSOE was sheer negligent in performing his duties. But going through the material, I find that there is nothing on record which shows that CSOE was in connivance with Sh. S.P. Sharma in taking away the money from the Branch though he did not perform his duties prudently and diligently. Hence, keeping in view the aspect of his non connivance, I feel that punishment awarded to him by Disciplinary Authority and confirmed by Appellate Authority does not commensurate with the gravity of the proven charges and I am of the considered opinion that there is substance in the review and I feel that it is a proper and appropriate case to take a lenient view and review the punishment, hence I, as a Reviewing Authority, hereby modify the punishment awarded to Sh. O.P. Agrawal by the Disciplinary Authority and confirmed by the Appellate Authority and instead award him the punishment of "compulsory retirement" under Regulation 4(h) of Central Bank of India Officer Employees' (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976 as modified from time to time."
(2.) It is this order of compulsory retirement, which operates against the petitioner and is the subject matter of challenge. During pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has also attained the age of superannuation.
(3.) It appears that the petitioner was posted as Branch Manager, Phawara Branch at Agra of the Central Bank of India, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him, for which a charge sheet was issued. Following three charges were levelled against the petitioner. "(i) On 12.2.05 the petitioner deliberately helped Mr. S.P. Sharma, Head Cashier-II in misappropriating cash to the tune of Rs.2,41,000/- and closed the short cash, which could be detected only on 14.2.05 at the time of checking of cash by Mr. R.S. Gupta, Internal Auditor. (ii) In the checking of cash conducted by Mr. R.S. Gupta, Internal Auditor on 14.2.05 the petitioner did not cooperate and created hindrance in smooth checking in order to mislead Mr. R.S. Gupta. (iii) On 14.2.05 the petitioner countersigned cheque no.014543 for Rs.2,40,000/- issued by Raghunath Prasad Agrawal, holder of Account No.17747 in favour of Mr. S.P. Sharma after business hours to make good the cash shortage detected on the said date.";