- (1.) The petitioner is Chief Regional Manager (Haryana and Union Territory, Chandigarh) State Bank of India since August/September, 1980. A complaint dated Feb. 13, 1980, having been received against the petitioner, a departmental enquiry was started against him. He was also placed under suspension He was charge-sheeted and an enquiry officer appointed. The learned counsel for the Bank stated during arguments that the evidence of the Bank against the petitioner has since been completed and the case is pending for recording of evidence of the petitioner. The petitioner has assailed the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him as also the order placing him under suspension in the present writ petition.
(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the complaint against the petitioner has been engineered by Mr. R P Goyal, Chairman, State Bank of India, who is inimically disposed towards him He has also been proceeded against departmentally and placed under suspension as a result of malafides on the part of Mr. R. P. Goyal. The departmental proceedings initiated against him as also the order placing him under suspension are liable to he quashed The contention is without merit Mr. R P. Goyal, Chairman, State Bank of India, has denied in his short reply that he was actuated by mala fides at any stage of the action taken against the petitioner. He has further averred that he was not associated with or concerned with the action taken against the petitioner by the other authorities of the Bank. In view of the reply filed by Mr. R. P. Goyal, it is difficult to hold that the departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner are liable to he quashed on the ground of mala fides on the part of the former.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has further contended that the enquiry against him has not been initiated by the competent authority. The appointing authority of the petitioner is either the Central Board or the Executive Committee of the Bank. The departmental proceeding against the petitioner have been initiated by the Managing Director The departmental proceedings having been initiated by an incompetent authority are liable to be set aside. The contention is without merit. In the written statement filed on behalf of the Bank it has been averred that the appointing authority of the petitioner is Executive Committee of the Central Board and by virtue of resolution passed by the Executive Committee dated March 31, 19/7, the Managing Director has been designated as the disciplinary authority for the disciplinary proceedings against senior staff officers to which category the petitioner belonged at the time when the action was taken. The Managing Director having been appointed as disciplinary authority is empowered to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner.;