Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. - (1.) By this writ application, the United Bank of India has challenged an award dated June 18, 1999 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta in Reference Case No. 28 of 1989. The following disputes were referred to the Tribunal for determination: a) Whether the action of the management of United Bank of India in dismissing from service Sri Gopal Chandra Ghosh, sub-staff, is justified? If not, what relief is the workman entitled to?
(2.) By the award impugned herein, the Tribunal found that although the concerned workman had taken recourse to very unfair means in order to get rid of option of transfer already submitted and instigated another employee to do illegal act but he did not deserve extreme punishment of dismissal from service. Thus, in exercise of power conferred under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Tribunal set aside the order of dismissal and modified the punishment to the effect that the management would reinstate him in service without any back wages and without any increment from the date of his dismissal upto the date of award. Being dissatisfied, the employer has come up with the instant writ application.
(3.) The allegations of the employer were as follows: "a) The workman as a probationary sub-staff was posted at Balarampur Branch of the Bank on December 24, 1975. On April 7, 1977 the respondent No. 2 gave his option for his posting to Gobordanga Branch of the Bank and he was released from Balarampur Branch on January 14, 1978. On joining Gobordanga Branch, for the reason best known to him, the employee had a mind to go back to Balarampur Branch knowing fully well that option given by an employee for second time was not entertainable. The respondent No. 2 however wanted to show to the Bank that before he was released from Balarampur Branch he submitted to the Bank a cancellation letter of his option in respect of his posting to Gobordanga Branch. b) With a view to achieve his aforesaid object, the respondent No. 2 wrote a letter to one Sri Subol Chandra Mondal, a sub-staff of Balarampur Branch in an inland letter enclosing therewith the letterhead of the Bank of the Balarampur Branch procured by the said respondent before hand. On the said letterhead the respondent No. 2 in his own hand writing addressed a letter to the Manager, Personnel Department cancelling his earlier option to Gobordanga Branch and the letter was dated December 3, 1977, i.e. a date prior to his release from Balarampur Branch viz. January 14, 1978. On the body of the letterhead the signature of Sri F.B. Ghosal, Accountant-in-Charge of Balarampur Branch was forged by respondent No. 2 with a remark "may be considered" which was also in his hand writing. In the inland letter the respondent No. 2 requested Sri Subol Chandra Mondal to put impression of the rubber stamp of the Accountant-in-Charge of Balarampur Branch and to give a number from the letter dispatch register of Balarampur Branch to complete the forgery. c) In the aforesaid way, the respondent No. 1 requested Sri Subol Chandra Mondal to keep the letter at Balarampur Branch in his personal file kept with the said branch in order to show that it was a copy of his application kept with the employer's file and further requested the said Sri Mondal to send him two blank letterheads with the seal of the Accountant-in-Charge, Balarampur Branch so that the workman concerned could use the letterhead as his copy of original application for cancelling his option for his posting at Gobordanga Branch. d) The above facts clearly showed mala fide intention of the respondent No. 2 and as a result of respondent No. 2's enclosing the Bank's letterhead inside the inland letter, which is against the regulation of post and telegraph department, the said inland letter was marked as bearing. e) On being interrogated, the respondent No. 2 first denied having any knowledge of the inland letter sent to Sri Mondal, but subsequently admitted in writing that the aforesaid inland letter had been sent by him and he had forged the signature of Sri F.B. Ghosal, the then Accountant-in-Charge of Balarampur Branch, on a letterhead of the said Branch. f) The employer's Dum Dum Branch received an M.T. for Rs. 8,970/-. This M.T. No. 45/80 appeared to have been issued by the Jhalda Branch of the petitioner with single signature vide M.T. advice Serial No. 2/302648. As per practice, Dum Dum Branch sent a copy of the credit offset voucher with a note issued under single signature "please confirm". This copy of the M.T. confirmation was returned by Jhalda Branch with the remark "it is not meant for us". On investigation, it transpired that in Dum Dum Branch S.B.A/c. No. 24870 was opened on May 30, 1980 in the name of one Sri Amal Das of 56B, Private Road, Calcutta-28 with a cash deposit of Rs. 5/-. From the respective ledger folio it further transpired that Dum Dum Branch credited a sum of Rs. 8,970/- to the S.B.A/c. No. 24870 on the basis of the said M.T. advice. Subsequently, a sum of Rs. 8,950/- was withdrawn from the said S.B. A/c. on June 16, 1980 leaving a balance of Rs. 25/-. On further scrutiny of the C.A. advice in question, it revealed that the said advice contained the apparent signature of Sri F.B. Ghosal, agent of Jhalda Branch, who was formerly Accountant-in-Charge of Balarampur Branch. But on being approached, Jhalda Branch denied having sent any M.T. to Dum Dum Branch for Rs. 8,970/-.";