D.N.Patel, J. - (1.) The present writ petition has been preferred mainly against the orders, passed by the disciplinary authority, which are at Annexure-2 of the memo of petition, whereby, major punishment has been imposed upon the petitioner to the effect that twelve increments with future effect have been stopped with a cumulative effect, in terms of Clause No. 19.6(d) Bipartite Settlement, 1966, as amended up to date. Consequently, all the salaries, perquisites etc. of the period of suspension, except the subsistence allowance, paid to the petitioner, have been forfeited. This order has been passed by the Regional Manager and disciplinary Authority on 27th May, 1994. Against this order, departmental appeal was preferred before the Deputy General Manager of the respondent Bank and the appeal, preferred by the petitioner, has been dismissed vide order dated 3rd January, 1995, which is at Annexure B to the counter affidavit, filed by the respondents. Against these two orders, the present writ petition has been preferred.
(2.) One interlocutory application bearing I.A. No. 1406 of 2009 has been allowed by this Court vide order dated 11.5.2009.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is basically not a peon of Allahabad Bank rather he is an Armed Guard of Allahabad Bank of Jogeshwar Colliery Branch. It has been alleged against the petitioner that on 13.8.1991 one letter was given to the petitioner from Jogeshwar Colliery Branch of Allahabad Bank to deliver the same at Ranchi Branch. It is alleged against the petitioner that the said letter was never delivered to the Branch at Ranchi, which has resulted into loss of Rs. 60,000/-, as the same was pertaining to forged demand draft. It has also been alleged in the memo of charge against the petitioner that the petitioner knew the contents of the letter.;