HARISH TANDON, J. - (1.) THIS appeal arises from the judgment and order dated December 20, 2013 passed in WP No.196 of 2013 by the Hon 'ble Single Bench whereby and whereunder the order of the appellant authority together with the order of dismissal and enquiry proceedings were set aside and the disciplinary authority was permitted to take steps for holding fresh enquiry beyond the stage of receipt of written statement filed by the private respondent. Admittedly, the private respondent was engaged as Assistant Manager in Port Blair branch of Syndicate Bank. Alleging that the private respondent abused his official position by liquidating a stale demand draft of Rs.66,000/ - and credited the same into the inoperative account of one Smti.Vimla Devi and thereafter withdrew Rs.20,000/ - through Automatic Teller Machine (ATM) card of the said Smti.Vimla Devi from ICICI Bank, the private respondent was placed under suspension vide order dated June 9, 2010. An enquiry was proposed to be held under Regulation 6 of the Syndicate Bank Officers Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976. A chargesheet was submitted to the private respondent who delivered his defence. Simultaneously, an FIR was lodged with the concerned police station on similar and identical allegations.
(2.) INITIALLY the private respondent attempted to stall the departmental enquiry as any disclosure of the defence may be used against him in the criminal case, but the enquiry officer proceeded with the enquiry proceedings which prompted the private respondent to file a writ petition ( WP No.779 of 2011) before this Court. By order dated November 18, 2011, the aforesaid writ petition was disposed of with categorical finding that the witness who would be deposing before the criminal court in the month of December 2011 should not be forced to appear before the enquiry officer until they adduced evidence in the criminal case but, in the event, the proceedings of the criminal case gets delayed the enquiry should not be withheld on such ground and such witness shall be examined by the enquiry officer beforehand. The Presenting Officer examined one witness, i.e. the Chief Manager, Tiruchirapally Main Branch, to prove the charge inflicted against the private respondent. As many as 30 documents were tendered, some of which appears to be the photocopy of the original, by the said witness and they were marked exhibits in the manner indicated hereinbelow: ''Q.4. Now I show you certain documents. Please identify the same. Ans. I confirm that the documents shown to me are collected by me from various Departments/offices during the course of my investigation and I identify the same. The documents identified by MW1 are marked as MEX -1 to MEX -30 (in the same order as per the list enclosed to the chargesheet) ''
(3.) SOME of the documents authored by another persons were admitted in evidence and marked as exhibit without calling for the respective author of the document to prove the contents thereof. The summary of the evidence so adduced by the said witnesses are that one Vimla Devi opened a saving bank account on June 21, 2008 with an initial deposit of Rs.100/ -. Since there was no operation in the said bank account it was made inoperative until a stale demand draft of Rs.66,000/ - was credited to that account. The said account holder made complaint on June 3, 2010 to the concerned police station alleging that in the night of June 1, 2010 three unidentified persons forcibly entered her house and obtained her signature on some papers by force and have also taken away the passbook. The Offsite Monitoring Cell of Headquarters at Manipal observed that on May 31, 2010 a stale demand draft of Rs.66,000/ - was liquidated and credited to the savings bank account of Vimla Devi and a sum of Rs.20,000/ - was withdrawn through ATM card of ICICI Bank. The private respondent misusing his official position liquidated the outstanding amount by using the user ID of the two Assistant Managers. The said witness further stated that the private respondent have admitted the aforesaid misconduct in a letter addressed to the Chief Manager which is marked as Ext.MEX -5.;