Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Shanta Pramanik vs Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank & Ors on 16 April, 2021
16.04.2021
Item No. 07
Ct. No. 04
PG
M.A.T. 2080 of 2017
With
IA no. CAN 1 of 2020 (Old CAN no. 1869 of 2020)
With
IA no. CAN 2 of 2020 (Old CAN no. 1870 of 2020)
Shanta Pramanik
Vs.
Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank & Ors.
Mr. Sanjay Saha ............for applicant
Md. Mokaram Hossain
Mr. Sandipan Maity....for respondents (bank)
C.A.N. 1869 of 2020 is application for
condonation of delay in preferring the appeal. Prayer
is to condone delay of 245 days. Since the appeal was
filed without certified copy, upon leave granted, there
is no report on the delay. We take the delay to be at
245 days.
Mr. Saha, learned advocate appears on
behalf of applicant and submits, his client had lost
his job, having been a clerk in the bank. He moved
the writ Court and thereafter, upon being
unsuccessful, he was unable to immediately move in
appeal. Moreover having obtained certified copy of
impugned order dated 6th March, 2017, unfortunately
he lost it. He submits, his client has been a victim of
circumstances. The delay be condoned and the appeal
heard. Mr. Hossain, learned advocate appears on
behalf of respondents (bank) and opposes the
application. He submits, the delay has not been
properly explained.
We have looked at, inter alia, paragraphs 5
to 8 in the application. Keeping in mind judgment of
Supreme Court in Collector Land Acquisition vs
Mst. Katiji reported in AIR 1987 SC 1353, we are
inclined and do allow the application on condoning
the delay. More so, because of record in earlier order
dated 22nd March, 2021 regarding applicant's case.
On 22nd March, 2021, inter alia, following
was said.
"Applicant wants setting aside of
impugned order by this application. He was
unsuccessful writ petitioner having had
challenged order of dismissal from service,
which would not prevent future employment.
Mr. Saha, learned advocate appears for the
applicant and submits, his client was made
a scapegoat.
On query from Court, we have been
shown order dated 15th March, 2021, said to
be by the disciplinary authority (page 3
missing). We reproduce a sentence from said
order dated 15th March, 2012:
"CSE replenished the defalcated
amount on 28.06.2011 by way of borrowing
from others."
Respondent bank will produce enquiry report
and extracts on the primary entries in its
books, regarding replenishment of defalcated
amount, the replenishment said to have
happened on 28th June, 2011. The disclosure
will be by affidavit. Copy to be served by 1 st
April, 2021. The affidavit is to be filed in
Court on adjourned date.
We require the above as additional
evidence in this appeal to enable us to pass
judgment. Requirement is because applicant
contends, others had repaid the money.
We record further that parties agree for
the appeal being heard on papers that were
before the first Court, as disclosed in this
application and the additional evidence to be
produced. Since the bank has appeared, we
dispense with all formalities including
service of notice of appeal."
Mr. Hossain files affidavit in opposition. Mr.
Saha points out from page 37 (extract from cash
receipt/payment register as of 28.06.2011), serial
numbers 251, 253 and 255 relate to entries regarding
replenishment of aggregate sum of Rs. 2,05,000/-.
Mr. Hossain does not dispute the entries.
Mr. Saha argues on basis of pleadings in the
stay application. He submits, his client was made
scapegoat upon having been made to act after closing
hours on 27th June, 2011, in making payment
without entries in bank's record. There was
inspection made of cash available at the bank, before
opening on 28th June, 2011 and the shortfall
detected. The money was replenished. Confession was
got extracted from his client. His client was advised to
stick to his confession and hence, he suffered order of
penalty for something he did not do.
Mr. Hossain relies on the inquiry report,
orders of disciplinary and appellate authorities,
confirmed by impugned order. He submits, case made
out in the stay application was not made in the
departmental proceedings. There is no case for
interference.
Parties are agreed that papers disclosed in
the stay application and affidavit in opposition were
all before the first Court. There is no additional
evidence produced in the appeal. Disciplinary
authority in order dated 15th March, 2012 said,
charge sheeted employee (CSE) replenished the
defalcated amount on 28th June, 2011 by way of
borrowing from others. We find from the entries in the
cash payment register, produced by the bank in its
affidavit, the aggregate replenished amount was
deposited by three persons. Appellant did not deposit
it. There appears to be complete non-application of
mind on the part of the disciplinary authority in
missing out such glaring discrepancy in what the
authority construed to be a crucial fact in the case. It
does therefore appear that appellant did never repay
the amount though he had confessed to having taken
it. In this context we reproduce the one sentence from
the inquiry report regarding replenishment.
"On 28.06.2011, i.e. the immediate next
day of the cash defalcation for Rs. 205000/-,
Sri Pramanik (CSE) replenished the entire
amount since he had misappropriated the
Bank's money directly from cash of Hemtabad
Branch on 27.06.2011...."
There is sufficient reason, therefore, to interfere.
We set aside impugned order as well as the
inquiry report and all orders passed pursuant thereto
in the disciplinary proceeding. The bank will cause
immediate fresh inquiry in the matter on disciplinary
proceeding from the stage of charge sheet, keeping in
mind what we have pointed out in this order. Inquiry
and all proceedings pursuant thereto must be
completed within period eight weeks from date. For
purpose of resumption of disciplinary proceeding from
the stage of charge sheet, suspension order of
appellant will be deemed to have revived, only for the
duration of it. There will be no claim of arrear
subsistence allowance or anything else, at this stage.
The appeal and applications are disposed of
as above.
(Arindam Sinha, J.)
(Kausik Chanda, J.)
