One of the companytentions canvassed before the High Court by respondent number1 was to the effect that when disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him by the Dy.
The said disciplinary authority appointed Shri B.B. Shesh as Enquiry Officer to enquire into the charges of misconduct.
The short question involved in this appeal is as to whether the Assistant General Manager of the Patna Division of the appellant bank was entitled to pass the penalty order against respondent number1.
Only on this short ground the writ petition was allowed.
The High Court did number, therefore, go into the other companytentions canvassed by respondent number1 against the impugned order of dismissal.
That the relevant regulations of the bank were number properly appreciated by the High Court.
That there was numberquestion of parallel proceedings being companyducted by two Deisciplinary Authorities at a given point of time.
General Manager, Central Zone, Lucknow, the Asstt.
The enquiry was companypleted on 24th February 1986.
Respondent number1 challenged the said order of dismissal by filling a writ petition in Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench.
The High Court accordingly set aside the order dated 21st March 1986 as companytained in Annexure 29 to the writ petition.
Background facts Respondent No.1 was serving in the appellant bank in the Junior Management Scale I while posted in the regional office of the appellant bank at Lucknow.
In the said writ petition respondent number1 raised various companytentions for challenging the impugned order.
Rival Contentions Shri Sanghi, learned senior companynsel for the appellant bank companytended that the High Court had patently erred in law in voiding the impugned order of respondent number7 on the ground that he was number companypetent to pass the said order.
The Enquiry Officer submitted his report together with the records of the enquiry proceedings and other documents to the Disciplinary Aurhotiry.
The chargesheet was served on the respondent number1 by the Deputy General Manager of the Bank working at the Central Zone, Lucknow.
It appears that the disciplinary proceedings companytinued for quite some time and in the meantime on 15th July 1985 the respondent number1 employee was transferred from Lucknow to Ranchi, Bihar.
His writ petition was ultimately number pressed.
That after companysidering the report of the Enquiry Officer and record of the proceedings, the Assistant General Manager, Zonal Office, Patna, passed an order dated 21st March 1986 dismissing the respondent number1 from service of the bank in terms of Regulation No.4 of the Allahabad Bank Discipline and Appeal Regulations, 1976 hereinafter referred to as the Regulations.
The said appointment was made the Deputy General Manager on 19th December 1983.
It is the aforesaid order of the High Court which has brought the appellant bank to this Court being aggrieved by the same.
General Manager, Zonal Office, Patna had numberauthority or jurisdiction to pass the impugned dismissal order and it was the Disciplinary Authority which initiated the proceedings which was companypetent to pass the final order of penalty, if any.
The appellant bank resisted the petition and companytended amongst others that as per the Regulations the Assistant General Manager, Zonal Office, Patna was fully companypetent as a Disciplinary Authority to pass the impugned dismissal order.
That there was numberhing in the Regulations to suggest that once a Disciplinary Authority had initiated the proceedings by serving a chargesheet and appointing an Enquiry Officer against the delinquent officer the proceedings cannot be transferred to another equally companypetent Disciplinary Authority as per the Regulations.
On 20th March 1986 the Assistant General Manager informed the respondent number1 officer that he has been numberinated by the companypetent authority to act as the Disciplinary Authority in respect of the enquiry against him.
It appears that after transfer of Respondent NO.1 to Ranchi branch of the bank, the Assistant General Manager, Zonal Office, Allahabad Bank, Patna Zone took over as the Disciplinary Authority in respect of the pending enquiry against respondent number1.
The High Court took the view that respondent number7, the Assistant General Manager, Patna Zone, Patna was number companypetent to pass the impugned order of dismissal.
Respondent NO.1 unsuccessfully challenged his transfer order before the High Court.
In order to appreciate the nature of the companytroversy between the parties it is necessary to numbere a few background facts.
He was served with a charge sheet dated 24th August 1983 companytaining charges of misconduct as Manager of the Palia Kalan Branch of the Allahabad Bank, District Lakhimpur Kheri during the period from April 1979 to December 1980.
J U D G E M E N T B. Majmudar, J. The appellant bank by special leave has brought in challenge the order passed by the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No.3841 of 1986 decided on 30th July 1993.
The respondent number1 was the writ petitioner before the High Court.
