Orissa High Court

Radha Krushna Nanda vs Central Bank Of India & Ors. .... ... on 25 June, 2024

Author: S.K. Panigrahi

Bench: S.K. Panigrahi

                                                             Signature Not Verified
                                                             Digitally Signed
                                                             Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR
                                                             Reason: Authentication
                                                             Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
                                                             Date: 19-Jul-2024 16:33:02



                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                W.P.(C) No.15424 of 2015
       (In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the
       Constitution of India, 1950).

       Radha Krushna Nanda                         ....             Petitioner (s)

                                        -versus-

       Central Bank of India & Ors.                ....       Opposite Party (s)

       Advocates appeared in the case through Hybrid Mode:
       For Petitioner(s)       :             Mr. Kausik Anand Guru, Adv.
                                        Mr. Prafulla Kumar Mohapatra, Adv.


       For Opposite Party (s)       :       Mr. Pradeep Kumar Mohapatra, Adv.

                   CORAM:
                   DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

                     DATE OF HEARING:-23.04.2024
                    DATE OF JUDGMENT: -25.06.2024
     Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J.

1. The Petitioner, in this Writ Petition, has made a prayer to quash the

order dated 24.10.2014 passed by the Disciplinary Authority, order

dated 03.11.2014 modifying the order dated 24.10.2014 passed by the

Disciplinary Authority and the order dated 08.07.2015 passed by the

Appellate Authority.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:

2. Facts culminating in filing of the present Writ Petition are that:

Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK

(i) The Petitioner was working as Head Cashier in Central Bank of India

under Banaparada Branch. He entered into service on 01.07.1983 as Sub-

staff bearing Employee No.75035 and, thereafter, promoted to the post

as Clerk on 01.12.1997. Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of Head

Cashier on 01.05.2013.

(ii) While the Petitioner working as Head Cashier of Bamparada Branch, he

was served with a suspension order dated 29.05.2013 suddenly without

issuing any show cause. Thereafter, Memorandum of charge was

framed on 17.05.2014 on the ground that he has been found to have

committed gross irregularities while working as Head Cashier at

Bamparada Branch and proceeding has been initiated against him.

(iii) Although the Petitioner was suspended from service since 29.05.2013,

but as per the provision of law, he was eligible to get subsistence

allowances. But for the period from 01.06.2013 to October, 2013 he has

not been paid any subsistence allowances.

(iv) Though the Petitioner asked for the documents on the basis of which

the charges were framed, the authority without supplying the same

initiated proceedings and concluded the same by imposing the

punishment of dismissal vide order dated 24.10.2014.

(v) Aggrieve by the order of punishment dated 24.10.2014, the Petitioner

filed an appeal on 1.11.2014 before the Appellate Authority. The

Petitioner appeared in person for hearing on 29.6.2015 and submitted

the detailed representation before the Appellate authority with a prayer

to set aside the order of dismissal as he has not committed any fraud

and misappropriation of money.

Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK

(vi) Despite submission of all the genuine difficulties and proof of his

innocence, instead of exonerating/ reducing punishment, the Appellate

Authority vide order dated 08.07.2015, which was received by the

Petitioner on 30.07.2015, upheld the order of punishment dismissing the

appeal filed by the Petitioner. Hence, this Writ Petition.

II. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner earnestly made the following

submissions in support of his contentions.

(i) The Petitioner had a bright service career and had served for more than

30 years of service from 01.07.1983 for the interest of Bank. Moreover,

no proceeding had been initiated or any other allegation on his service

career. But, on a baseless allegation he has been awarded with the major

penalty of dismissal without supplying the documents and notice

which is contrary to the service jurisprudence. Without considering all

such aspects the Appellate Authority has also uphold the order of

punishment which is not sustainable in law and liable to be quashed.

(ii) At the fag end of his service career after rendering more than 30 years

of service having clean service career he has been dismissed from

service without following the due procedure of law. Non-releasing of

the suspension allowance to the Petitioner is arbitrary should not be

sustainable in law. Therefore, it was submitted that a direction may be

issued to the Opposite Parties/ Bank to reconsider the case of the

Petitioner imposing any other punishment instead of the order of

dismissal as the same is disproportionate.

Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK

III. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES/ BANK:

4. In reply, learned counsel for the Opposite Parties/ Bank earnestly made

the following submissions in support of his contentions:

(i) The Petitioner in the aforesaid Writ Petition challenges the orders of

dismissal from service passed by the Disciplinary Authority as well as

the Appellate Authority of the Opposite Parties/ Bank owing to a charge

sheet dated 22.04.2014 for debiting and crediting from bank customers'

Servings Account un-authorizedly, while working as single window

operator (SWO) at Balasore Branch as those do not require second

authorisation, on the complaint of a Account Holder named Sri

Niranjan Sahu.

(ii) After receiving the complaint, an inquiry was conducted and it was

ascertained that the Petitioner was debiting and crediting

unauthorisedly in following Savings Accounts named;

1. A/c.1860607836 of Mr. Niranjan Sahu, a sum of Rs. 1,40,000/-;

2. A/c.No.1860653941 of Mr.Dillip Kumar Patra, of Rs.80,000/-;

3. A/c.No.1860670693 of M/s.Payal Industries, of Rs.2,80,000/-;

4. A/c.No.1860645668 of Mr.Pradip Kumar Patra, of Rs.13,000/-;

5. A/c.No.1860650791 of Mr.Suklambar Satpathy of Rs. 1,80,000/-;

6. The Petitioner also unauthorisedly transferred funds to Account

of Suklambar Satpathy from the Account of one Mr. Gopal

Chandra Behera, amounting to Rs. 1,70,000/-.

Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK

(iii) Accordingly, the charge sheet dated 22.04.2014 was issued as the

Petitioner's explanation was found unsatisfactory and the Bank

authority decided to hold a Departmental Inquiry on the charges as

aforesaid.

(iv) After receiving the charge sheet, the Petitioner participated in the said

inquiry and the Inquiring Officer has found the Petitioner guilty of the

charges. After considering the entire record of Departmental Inquiry,

the Authority has awarded the punishment of dismissal from the Bank

service with immediate effect.

(v) Being aggrieved by the said order of dismissal, the Petitioner preferred

an appeal before the Appellate Authority-cum- D.G.M., Zonal Office,

Kolkata. The Appellate Authority dismissed the said appeal, inter alia,

observing that the punishment awarded by the Disciplinary Authority

is just and proper and the same is commensurate with the gravity of the

charges leveled against the Petitioner.

(vi) It is pertinent to mention here that in the Disciplinary Proceeding

following the due procedure, the authorities had given sufficient

opportunities to the petitioner to defend his case. The Disciplinary

Authorities had also afforded personal hearing of the Petitioner in the

said inquiry. Accordingly, the Petitioner appeared before the authorities

and confessed that he had borrowed some money from his friends and

relatives for treatment of his ailing wife who was suffering from major

health problem since 2005 and, therefore, he was doing debit and credit

in the Savings Bank Accounts of the aforesaid five persons.

Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK

(vii) The Petitioner after coming to know about the inquiry, deposited the

aforesaid withdrawal amount in the Savings Bank Accounts of the

aforesaid persons, in order to take defense in the inquiry that the bank

had sustained no loss due to the said unauthorised debit and credit

transactions committed by him.

(viii) In view of the facts and circumstances narrated above, the action of the

Petitioner is clearly coming under the purview of guilty of gross

misconduct within the meaning of Para-5(j) of "Memorandum of

Settlement, dated 10.04.2002" and the Disciplinary/Inquiry Authority

has rightly recommended for imposition of punishment of dismissal.

(ix) It was contended that even though by the misconduct of the employee,

the employer does not suffer any financial loss, he can be removed from

service in case of loss of confidence, particularly in the Banks where the

higher standard of service with honesty and integrity is required as he

has to deal with the public money. To that effect, he had placed reliance

on the judgments of the Apex Court in the cases of Disciplinary

Authority-cum-Regional Manager and Ors. -vrs.- Nikunja Bihari

Patnaik1, State Bank of India and Ors. -vrs.- Bela Bagchi and Ors.2 and

Deputy General Manager (Appellate Authority) and Others -vrs.- Ajai

Kumar Srivastava3.

(x) In the above mentioned premises and factual matrix, it was contended

that this Writ Petition deserves to be dismissed.

(1996) 9 SCC 69 2 (2005) 7 SCC 435

3 (2021)2 SCC 612

Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK

IV. COURT'S REASONING AND ANALYSIS:

5. Perused the materials available on records and considered the rival

submissions made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the

learned counsel for the Opposite Parties/ Bank.

6. In the case at hand, as it appears, after receiving the complaint, an

inquiry was conducted and it was ascertained that the Petitioner was

debiting and crediting unauthorisedly in some Savings Accounts.

7. Charge sheet was issued on 22.04.2014 as the Petitioner's explanation

was found unsatisfactory and the Bank authority decided to hold a

Departmental Inquiry on the charges leveled against the Petitioner.

8. After receiving the charge sheet, the Petitioner participated in the said

inquiry and the Inquiring Officer has found the Petitioner guilty of the

charges. After considering the entire record of Departmental Inquiry,

the Authority has awarded the punishment of dismissal from the Bank

service with immediate effect.