AMRITA SINHA,J. - (1.) The petitioner prays for setting aside the entire disciplinary proceeding, the enquiry report, the order of penalty of dismissal from service passed by the disciplinary authority and the order of the appellate authority affirming the order of the disciplinary authority. The petitioner also prays for releasing her arrear salary, and all terminal benefits in view of her superannuation. A prayer has also been made for declaring the rule/policy of the bank causing forfeiture of leave encashment or lapse of leave on termination of service as unconstitutional and arbitrary.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are as follows: The petitioner was an officer of the UCO Bank. When the petitioner was serving as the Senior Manager posted in the Inspection Department in the Zonal Office Kolkata she was called by the disciplinary authority on 2 nd August, 2016 and enquired about ten RTGS transactions amounting to Rs. 8.9 crore.
(3.) The Zonal Manager, Kolkata zone on 6 th August, 2016 sought for an explanation from the petitioner as to why disciplinary action would not be taken against her with reference to the investigation report of the vigilance department dated 28th July, 2016. The petitioner duly submitted her reply on 19 th August, 2016 denying the charges levelled against her. A further notice was issued on 3 rd September, 2016 seeking her explanation with regard to the various accounts that were opened during her tenure in the Bank. Reference was again made to the investigation report of the vigilance department. The petitioner submitted her explanation thereto vide her letter dated 6th September, 2016.;