R.L. Mehrotra, J. - (1.) The present petition has been preferred under Article 226 of Constitution of India by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 25.5.2006 dismissing the petitioner from service and order dated 26.10.2006 in Appeal affirming the dismissal order with a further request to reinstate him in service, revise the amount of his provident fund and provide him all the retiral benefits.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as a clerk in the respondent bank in the year 1971. On 6.4.1977, a society known as "Central Bank Employees Salary Earners Cooperative Society Ltd." (hereinafter referred as 'the Society') has been constituted and registered at Meerut under the provisions of the Cooperative Societies Act for the welfare of the salaried employees of the bank working in the state of Uttar Pradesh. The aims and objects of the society are to accept deposits through savings, current and fixed deposits and to disburse loans to the members of the society. The account of the society was opened in the branch office of the respondent bank at Meerut and all monetary transactions of the society were carried through the said bank account. The management of the bank had never objected to the constitution and activities of the society. In the year 1977, petitioner was elected as President of the said society.
(3.) The petitioner alleges that the District Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Meerut, in an arbitrary and illegal manner initiated an inquiry by appointing Shri Harinder Singh who inspected the books and accounts of the society and submitted a superficial report on the basis of which a FIR has been lodged on 10th October, 2004 against the petitioner and eight others on the ground that the society has obtained deposits and disbursed loans in violation of Banking Regulations. Consequently, the petitioner was placed behind bars and pursuant to the same was placed under suspension. An inquiry was also initiated by the bank in which a charge-sheet was served on the petitioner with vague charges. For his assistance in the inquiry proceedings the petitioner nominated Mr. A.S. Yadav, Senior Manager of the bank at Hathras Branch as his assisting officer (in short 'AO') against which the management had no objection. Original documents, relied upon by the management, were not produced during the inquiry proceedings despite objections being raised by the petitioner. None of the witnesses examined from the side of management supported the charges leveled against the petitioner. After his election as president of the society the petitioner had never been posted at Meerut. The inquiry proceedings were not conducted as per bank Regulations. Petitioner tried to examine Mr. P.C. Dabar, Ex Assistant Manager of the bank as his defence witness but after recording his examination in chief, the inquiring authority (in short 'IA') closed the proceedings after leveling highly untoward remarks against the AO. The AO immediately endorsed rebuttal of the aforesaid false allegations. Petitioner by means of representation dated 16.2.2006 requested for change of the IA but the disciplinary authority turned down his request. The IA in order to deprive the petitioner of a fair opportunity of hearing fixed such dates on which AO of petitioner was busy in another disciplinary case of Mr. S.P. Srivastava at Etawah and that too in the knowledge of the management as well as the IA. Without informing the petitioner, the IA fixed 21st February 2006 and behind the back of the petitioner concluded the proceedings. Petitioner submitted his reply against the report submitted by the IA claiming therein the opportunity to produce defence witness but his request was turned down by the disciplinary authority who by order dated 25.5.2006 passed the order of dismissal from service. Petitioner preferred an appeal against this order but that too was rejected without assigning proper reasons.;