- (1.) THE Petitioner prays for quashing of the Order dated 10. 8. 2005, as contained in annexure P-14, whereby and whereunder, the Disciplinary Authority imposed the punishment of dismissal from service upon the petitioner with a further order that the entire period of suspension would be treated as such (period of suspension) and that nothing would be payable to him towards salary, allowances and consequential benefits, including annual increments, save and except the subsistence allowance already paid to him. The petitioner also prays for quashing the Order dated 18. 10. 2005, as contained in annexure P-16, whereby and whereunder, the Appellate Authority, dismissed the Appeal of the Petitioner, thereby upholding the Order of punishment of "dismissal from service without notice" imposed upon him by the Disciplinary Authority.
(2.) THE facts of this case are that while working as a Peon in the service Branch of the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, situated on 14, N. S. Road, Kolkata, the Petitioner was put under suspension by an order dated 26. 5. 1997 (vide annexure P-1) issued by the Respondent No. 2 i. e. the Asst. General Manager being the Notified Disciplinary Authority of the Petitioner (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as the disciplinary Authority) for the allegation of being involved in a criminal case purportedly registered on 22. 5. 1997 in the Hare Street Police station, Kolkata which was subsequently followed by his arrest on the same day. By reason of the order of suspension it was indicated that the said order will not affect the Bank's right to take disciplinary action against the petitioner in terms of the bipartite settlement.
(3.) DURING the pendency of the aforementioned criminal case, the petitioner received a Notice dated 7. 4. 2003 (as contained in annexure p-3) issued by the Disciplinary Authority whereby and whereunder, while referring to the incident which was the subject matter of the criminal case, he informed the petitioner that his acts were prejudicial to the bank's interests which had tarnished its image and that they were gross misconducts. Accordingly, the petitioner was directed to show cause as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him. The relevant text of the said Order reads as follows: "while working as Peon at our Service Branch, Kolkata in the year 1997, it is reported that you have allegedly committed the following acts of gross misconduct. i) You, being the peon the Service Branch, Kolkata, which is situated at 14, N. S. Road, Kolkata in the same premises of our N. S. Road branch, was having unrestricted access to our N. S. Road Bench. Y6u were having information about the customers who are obtaining payments from the cash counter of the aforesaid branch of the Bank. Therefore you conspired with miscreants and arranged for dacoity at the crossing of the Old China Bazar Street and Canning Street, kolkata. On 22. 3. 97 at about 1. 15 PM whom Shri Ardhendu Panda s/o Shri Nirod Baran Panda of C-3/3 Gautam Vihar Complex PO agrico P. S. Sitaramdera, Jamshedpur came out of the premises of the bank with certain amount of money kept in a black colour VIP suitcase, you pointed it out to the other culprits, on looking to your signal, other culprints snatched away the suitcase containing money and on resistance of Shri Panda. They used firearms from close proximity and injured Shri Panda. Some other persons were also injured in the bomb blasted by other culprits. Violating the code of conduct, you have disclosed the secrecy of the Bank to the miscreants/members of the dacoity team, which resulted in death of the Bank's two valuable Customers. Your aforesaid acts are prejudicial to the Bank's interest and tarnished the image of the bank. These are gross misconducts in terms of para 19. 5 (b) and 19. 5 (j) of the first bipartite settlement dated 19. 10. 66 (amended from time to time) You are therefore, required to show cause to the undersigned as to why disciplinary action should not be initiated against you. If, no reply is received within 15 days of receipt of this letter, it will be presumed that you have nothing to say in this regard and the bank will commence disciplinary action against you. (Quoted Verbatim);