- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the substituted respondent No. 1.
(2.) The appellant Bank official is aggrieved by the impugned Judgement dated 13.09.2013, passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge, in W.P. (S) No. 3679 of 2003, whereby the writ application filed by the original respondent No. 1, challenging the punishment of compulsory retirement imposed upon him by the Disciplinary Authority, as confirmed by the Appellate and Revisional Authorities, have been allowed by the Writ Court, setting aside the punishment order, finding it to be disproportionate to the proved charges, and directing the Bank to pass fresh order on the quantum of punishment.
(3.) The original respondent No. 1 was an officer of the Bank of India, and he was served with the memorandum of charges containing four charges. Since we are concerned only with the two charges which have been proved, the charges not proved are not being taken into consideration. The proved charges were Charge No. 1 and Charge No. 3, which are as follows:- Article 1:- You have in gross violation to the Bank's laid down norms/rules financed tractor loans in as much as these tractor loans were financed out of service area of the branch, without creation of mortgage/Bank's charge before disbursement, without conducting any post sanction inspection to ensure proper end use of the funds and without registration/insurance of most of the tractor/trailor and/or other implements. You have in the process of financing the said tractor loans coerced the borrowers to take tractors/implements from a particular tractor dealer with ulterior motives and with a view to unduly accommodate the tractor dealer. The details of these tractor loan accounts are given in Annexure-A. Article 3:- You with a view to unduly accommodate the borrower and with ulterior motives sanctioned a loan of Rs. 1 lakh under PMRY Scheme to Ms. Ritu Kumari Sah though she was not resident of the service area of the Branch and inspite of the fact that her earlier application was rejected by D.I.C. The instant application was personally got forwarded from DIC by you. In the said account you also failed to ensure proper utilisation of the loan and thus aided and abetted with the borrower to misutilise the loan. ;