S.N. Shukla, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. H.G.S. Parihar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Amit Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. D.K. Pathak, learned counsel for the respondent -Bank.
(2.) BRIEFLY the facts of the case are that the petitioner while posted at Piro district Arrah (Bihar) on 19 December 2009 was sanctioned LFC for Goa. He went to Goa by a private vehicle and on 24 February 2010 submitted his TA Bill for the aforesaid LFC. A show cause notice was issued to him on 18 March 2010 with regard to submission of delayed T.A bill and for taking excess suspense advance of Rs. 1 lakh. The petitioner submitted reply of show cause notice on 27.3.2010. Another notice was issued to him on 20.4.2010 to reply further query with respect to place of journey and stay etc. The petitioner further submitted reply on 15.5.2010, whereby he submitted that he did not keep any other bill except TA bill. Therefore, in furtherance of inquiry the Manager of the Bank wrote a letter to "Lucknow Tour & Travels" to know about the package of the tour offered to the petitioner. The aforesaid travel agency replied that it never received any payment in respect of bill No. 09 from the petitioner. Therefore, on 21 February 2011 a charge sheet was issued to the petitioner in terms of Regulation 3(1) read with Regulation 24 of Punjab National Bank Officers Employees (Conduct) Regulations 1977. The charge levelled against the petitioner was that he defrauded the bank by giving false declaration for availment of LFC and raised excess suspense advance. He had also been permitted by the Bank to keep his family at Lucknow but in the LFC he claimed Railway fare to and fro of his wife from Piro to Lucknow, whereas he had shown his journey to Goa via Lucknow. Accordingly, he defrauded the Bank to the tune of Rs. 43,231/ - and also for giving false declaration of availing of LFC. The petitioner submitted reply of charge sheet on 5.5.2011 denying all the charges. The Inquiry Officer conducted inquiry and submitted an inquiry report on 30.3.2012. On the basis of inquiry report the punishment order dated 24.8.2012 was issued against the petitioner imposing major penalty of reduction to a lower Grade in terms of Regulation 4(g) of the Punjab National Bank Officers Employees (Discipline & Appeal) Regulations, 1977 and further to place him in MMG scale -II at initial stage.
(3.) AGGRIEVED petitioner preferred an appeal against the order of punishment before the opposite party No. 2, which was rejected vide order dated 18.6.2013. The appellate authority confirmed the penalty imposed upon the petitioner.;