K VISHWANATHAN Vs. DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY INDIAN BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the above writ petitions is to the orders of punishment passed against the petitioner.

(2.) In W.P.No.9266 of 2000, the petitioner has questioned the correctness of the charge memo dated 01.02.2000 charging the petitioner for unauthorised absence from duty from 28.06.1995 which culminated in an order dated 12.04.1999 imposing a major penalty of reduction of pay by two stages in the time scale of pay drawn by the petitioner for a period of two years and that the petitioner will not earn increments of pay during the period of two years and on expiry of the two year period, the reduction will have the effect of postponement of future increments of his pay.

(3.) In W.P.No.9267 of 2000, the petitioner has questioned the charge memo dated 01.02.2000 charging the petitioner for unauthorised absence from 19.12.1997 even after the imposition of punishment by order dated 12.04.1999 and even thereafter failed to report for duty, which ultimately culminated in an order of punishment dated 29.01.2007 imposing the major penalty of compulsory retirement from service. The appeals which were filed by the petitioner against the orders of punishment came to be dismissed and the petitioner is before this Court. Background facts: