P. KUSHERI Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
LAWS(CAL)-1989-4-70
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on April 07,1989

P. Kusheri Appellant
VERSUS
Union of India And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Mohitosh Majumdar, J. - (1.) The Writ Petition is directed against the entire disciplinary proceedings, the appointment of the Enquiry Officer, the order of suspension, the enquiry report, the order of dismissal dated March 25, 1986 and the order of the Appellate Authority dated July 8, 1986.
(2.) The petitioner at the relevant time was the Assistant Branch Manager of Central Bank of India posted at Japlaiguri (hereinafter referred to as "the said Bank"). Prior to the posting as Assistant Branch Manager of the said Bank at Jalpaiguri, the petitioner held the post of Deputy Chief Officer (Branch Manager) at Tufangung.
(3.) The broad facts are as follows: The Chief Manager of the said Bank by Memo dated September 29, 1984 directed the petitioner to explain certain irregularities regarding the functions of Tufangung Branch, with reference to his visit to Tufangung on September 27, 1984. After receipt of the said Memo, the petitioner submitted a reply explaining, inter alia, therein the facts and circumstances in support of the action taken. The petitioner, inter alia, pointed out the urgent need to increase the man-power of the said Branch for its smooth functioning and also stated that the deposits and profits were made by the said Branch after the appointment of the Branch Manager of the said Branch. The petitioner, thereafter, was transferred as As Branch Manager of the Jalpaiguri Branch. While posted at Jalpaiguri. a Memorandum dated June 11, 1985 issued to the petitioner by Sri J. J. Bhattacharjee (for short the Regional Manager hereafter), the Regional Manager acting as the Disciplinary Authority. Certain allegations were made against the petitioner as regards the excessive expenditure incurred on account of entertainment expenses during his stay at Tufangung Branch as Branch Manager. The Regional Manager issued another Memo dated June 12, 1985 that since the petitioner did not reply to Memo dated April 9, 1985 by April 30, 1985 it should be construed that the petitioner no explanation to offer. The petitioner duly replied to the said memorandum by a letter dated June 22, 1985.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.