Rakesh Srivastava, J. - (1.) The order dated 31.03.2011 by means of which the petitioner has been dismissed from service with retrospective effect, is under challenge in the present writ petition.
(2.) On 16.05.1972 the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Clerk/Cashier/Godown keeper on temporary basis in the Allahabad District Cooperative Bank Limited, Allahabad (for short 'Bank'), a Cooperative Society constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 (for short 'Act'). The services of the petitioner were later on confirmed on the said post. On 30.09.1980 the petitioner was promoted on temporary and ad-hoc basis on the post of Branch Manager. By an order dated 29.07.2000, the petitioner was placed under suspension for the alleged irregularities committed by him during the period the petitioner was posted as Branch Manager of the Meja Branch of the Bank at Allahabad. The Senior Manager (Accounts) was appointed as Inquiry Officer to hold an inquiry against the petitioner. Subsequently, a charge sheet dated 24.10.2000, containing in all 24 charges relating to financial irregularities, was served upon the petitioner. On 23.03.2001 the petitioner submitted his reply denying the charges levelled against him in the said charge-sheet.
(3.) The Inquiry Officer without holding any oral inquiry, whatsoever, submitted his report. The petitioner was, thereafter, served with a show cause notice dated 17.05.2002 along with the inquiry report dated 21.05.2001 requiring the petitioner to show cause as to why the penalty mentioned in the said show cause notice be not inflicted upon the petitioner. Charge nos. 1 to 19, 22 and 24 were found to be proved by the Inquiry Officer. On 02.11.2002, the petitioner submitted his reply to the show cause notice wherein it was specifically stated by the petitioner that no oral inquiry, whatsoever, was held by the Inquiry Officer. The opposite party no. 4 on 10.01.2003 passed an order by means of which the following punishments were inflicted upon the petitioner: a. The petitioner was reduced to the minimum of the pay scale. b. The salary of the petitioner over and above the subsistence allowance was ordered to be forfeited for the period the petitioner was under suspension. c. The amount paid/ payable to the depositors pertaining to the petitioner was ordered to be recovered from the petitioner. d. The petitioner was not be given independent charge of any branch of the Bank in future.;