- (1.) The writ petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the appellate authority dated August 17, 1998 rejecting her appeal, preferred against the order of the disciplinary authority dated December 27, 1997, imposing the major penalty of reduction to a lower stage-in the time scale of pay by one increment for one year, and directing that she would not earn increment of pay during the period of one year, though on expiry of one year the reduction would not have the effect of postponing the future increment of her pay in terms of the relevant rules.
(2.) At the relevant point of she was working as an officer in New Bank of India that subsequently merged with the respondent bank (the Punjab National Bank). The proceeding was initiated by charge-sheet dated August 16, 1994 on the following sole article of charge : "On account of laxity on the part of Miss Bhattacharyee in exercising control required on the functioning of the Day Book Department at Bo. Ezra Street. Cal., fraudulent transactions were made by Shri Dhaheswar Rai. Officer (u/s). She failed to maintain books properly as per guidelines. As a result, the fraud could not come to light earlier and Bank's fund to the tune of Rs. 45-00 lacs approx is in jeopardy."
(3.) The enquiry officer submitted an undated report recording his findings, which are : "I find that the above charges have not been proved due to the following reasons : 1) It could not be proved that the concerned Long Book was in the custody of the CO and it was destroyed/tampered by her or at her instances. 2) It could also not be proved by the PO that the maintenance of the Transfer Journal was the responsibility of the CO. I summarise my findings on charges against Ms. Raya Bhattacharjee as under: Charge 1(A)(i) Article-l: partly proved. Charge 1(A)(ii) Article-l : not proved. Charge 1(8) (i & ii) Article-l : not proved.";