Patna High Court
Gajendra Kumar Jha vs Chairman Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank ... on 25 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20594 of 2016
======================================================
Gajendra Kumar Jha Son of late Bisheshwar Jha Resident of VillagePost-
Hariharpur, P.S.- Kamtaul, District- Darbhanga. At Present office Assistant,
Kharka, Branch Kharka Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. Chairman Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank and Ors
2. The General Manager cum Disciplinary Authority Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank,
Head Office, Muzaffarpur.
3. The Inquiry Officer cum Branch Manager, Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank Branch
Arariya chauk, Sitamarhi.
4. Regional Manager, Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, Regional Office, Sitamarhi.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jagjit Roshan, Advocate
Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prabhakar Jha, Advocate
Mr. Mukund Mohan Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 25-11-2021
Heard the learned counsels for the parties.
2. In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for
following reliefs:
"1. That the present writ application is
being filed on behalf of the petitioner for the
issuance of writ in nature of certiorai or any other
writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders for
setting aside the order of dismissal dated 5.8.2016
vide letter no. 839 passed by the respondent no. 2 in
the capacity of disciplinary authority in terms
Rules/Regulation 39(2)(b)VI of Uttar Bihar Gramin
Bank (Officers and employee) Service Regulation
2010 and further in the capacity of appellate
authority, also decline to decide the petitioner memo
of appeal referring Regulation 49 of Service
Regulation (Appeal not preferred within stipulated
Patna High Court CWJC No.20594 of 2016 dt.25-11-2021
period 45 days) vide letter no. 401 on 27.10.2016 and
further for the issuance of direction to the
respondents for the reinstatement of this petitioner as
office assistant with all monetary benefits payble to
him from the date of his dismissal."
3. The petitioner was subjected to disciplinary
proceeding which was concluded in imposition of penalty of
dismissal from service on 05.08.2016. Being aggrieved and
dissatisfied by the order of dismissal, petitioner has preferred a
appeal before the appellate authority on 26.05.2016 and it was
rejected on 27.10.2016 on the sole ground that appeal was not
within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of order of
dismissal.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
order of dismissal dated 05.08.2016 was not communicated to
him. Thereafter he had approached the disciplinary authority and
he had provided the order of dismissal.
5. Both the learned counsels for respective parties are
not in position to apprise this Court about communication of order
of dismissal dated 05.08.2016. At this stage, it is necessary to re-
produce Regulation No. 49 of the Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank
(Officers and Employee) Service Regulations, 2010 (for short
"Regulations, 2010"), which is as under:
"49. Right to appeal.-
(1) An officer or employee may
prefer an appeal against any order
Patna High Court CWJC No.20594 of 2016 dt.25-11-2021
passed under these regulations to
the Appellate Authority mentioned
in regulation 50 within a period of
45 days from the date of receipt of
such order.
(2) The Appellate Authority shall
decide the appeal and pass order
preferably within a period of 6 months
from the date of receipt of the appeal."
6. Perusal of the Regulation No. 49 it stipulates that
officers and employees were permitted to prefer an appeal against
the order passed under the Regulation within a period of 45 days
from the date of receipt of such order. There is no material
information relating to communication of dismissal order dated
05.08.2016 to the petitioner. That apart, issue is that there is delay
in preferring appeal, word used in Regulation No. 49 that an
officer and employee preferred an appeal and it is not mandating
the officer or employee to submit the appeal within 45 days, in
other words, if appeal is presented beyond 45 days it is
condonable. In fact, in the present case, there is not much delay
having regard to the date of dismissal order dated 05.08.2016 and
presentation of appeal dated 15.10.2016 read with the appellate
authority's order dated 27.10.2016.
7. In the light of aforesaid facts and circumstances
appellate authority's order dated 27.10.2016 is set aside. The
matter is remitted back to the appellate authority to decide the
petitioner's appeal on delay and merits within a period of three
Patna High Court CWJC No.20594 of 2016 dt.25-11-2021
months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The
petitioner is permitted to file additional memorandum of appeal, if
any, within a period of four weeks from today.
8. Accordingly, the instant petition stands allowed.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
rakhi/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 02.12.2021
Transmission Date
