Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Subhash Chandra Bose vs The Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin ... on 18 January, 2023
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11193/2020
Subhash Chandra Bose S/o Shri Ram Lal Prasad, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Navin Nagar, Scindia Bazar, Hilsa, Tehsil - Hilsa,
District Nalanda, Bihar.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank, Through Its
Chairman, Head Office - Tulsi Tower, 9Th B Road,
Sardarpura, Jodhpur.
2. The Chief General Manager (Vigilence), Rajasthan
Marudhara Gramin Bank, Tulsi Tower, 9Th B Road,
Sardarpura Jodhpur.
3. The Chairman, Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank, Tulsi
Tower, 9Th B Road, Sardarpura Jodhpur.
4. The Appellate Authority, Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin
Bank, Through Its Chief General Manager (Vigilence),
Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank, Tulsi Tower, 9Th B
Road, Sardarpura Jodhpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Kumar Godara
For Respondent(s) : Mr. BL Tiwari a/w
Mr. Akshay Chandra Tiwari
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
18/01/2023
1. This civil writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"(i) It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that the
impugned award/order dated 15.02.2020 (Annexure-3)
and appellant order dated 29.09.2020 (Annexure) may
kindly be quashed and set aside.
(ii) In By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
petitioner may be reinstated in the services with all
previous and consequential benefits of services.
(iii) Any other appropriate direction or order which this
Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of
the case may kindly be granted
(Downloaded on 23/01/2023 at 10:53:06 PM)
(2 of 4) [CW-11193/2020]
(iv) Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the
petitioners".
2. Brief facts of the case as placed before this Court by
learned counsel for the petitioner are that the petitioner was
appointed as Officer Scale-I through direct recruitment in the
respondent-Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank. While the
petitioner was working as Branch Manager at Manpur Branch
Distt.Sirohi, of the respondent-Bank, certain irregularities
were alleged to have been committed by him. Therefore, the
disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner,
and on the basis of report of the Enquiry Officer, so
appointed, the Disciplinary Authority passed the impugned
order dated 15.02.2020, for removal of the petitioner from
service.
2.1 Being aggrieved with the same, the petitioner filed an
appeal before Appellant Authority against said order, but the
same was dismissed vide the impugned order dated
29.09.2020; hence, the present petition has been preferred
by the petitioner laying challenge to both the aforementioned
orders.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
both the impugned orders were passed with affording an
adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and
therefore, the same are not sustainable in the eye of law,
more particularly, when a bare perusal of the impugned
order clearly reveals that the same were passing without due
application of mind. He therefore, submits that the present
(Downloaded on 23/01/2023 at 10:53:06 PM)
(3 of 4) [CW-11193/2020]
case is a glaring example of violation of the principles of
natural justice.
3.1. Learned counsel for petitioner placed reliance on the
judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Bhagat Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.
(Civil Appeal No. 292/1983, decided on 24.01.1983).
4. On other hand, learned counsel for respondents
opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner
and submits that the allegations against the petitioner are
very serious, as the same involves financial irregularities
having been committed by the petitioner, and therefore, the
petitioner does not deserve any relief from this Court, as
prayed for in the present petition.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent further submits
that the petitioner himself was represented before the
enquiry officer concerned, thereby duly participated in the
proceeding in question; in course whereof, at no point of
time, the petitioner has raised any objection in regard to the
proceeding in question; the petitioner also submitted the
written gist dated 23.12.2019 and admitted his guilt, while
praying for mercy.
5.1. Learned counsel for respondent in support of his
submissions placed reliance on the judgments rendered by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of The General
Manager (P) Punjab & Sind Bank & Ors. Vs. Daya
Singh (Civil Appeal No. 4120/2007, decided on
28.07.2010) and Mihir Kumar Hazara Choudhary Vs. Life
(Downloaded on 23/01/2023 at 10:53:06 PM)
(4 of 4) [CW-11193/2020]
Insurance Corpn.& Anr. (Civil Appeal No. 7612/2009)
decided on 11.09.2017.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties as well as
perused the record of the case, alongwith the judgments
cited at the Bar.
7. This Court finds that the Enquiry Officer, after carefully
perusing and duly considering all the documents and
material placed during the course of disciplinary proceeding
against the petitioner, came to the conclusion that the
petitioner has committed an irregularity, thereby clearly
violated the provisions of Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank
(Officers and Employees) Service Regulation, 2010.
8. On the basis of report and material on record, the
Disciplinary Authority as well as Appellant Authority arrived
at a conclusion that the petitioner was actively involved in
irregularity in question.
9. The judgment cited on behalf of the petitioner does not
render any assistance to his case.
10. Thus, this Court finds that the impugned orders passed
by Disciplinary Authority as well as Appellant Authority are
well reasoned orders, and do not warrant any interference by
this Court.
11. Resultantly, the present petition fails, and the same is
hereby dismissed. All pending applications are disposed of.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
303-SKant/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
