The loan was taken by that person from the State Bank of India.
When the selection took place for fresh appointment under the 1990 Rules, the appellant was number selected by the Revenue Divisional Officer vide order dated 7.3.1992 while the 5th respondent was selected.
The appellant was companyvicted for one month rigorous imprisonment by the trial companyrt.
In further appeal the Commissioner set aside the said order.
But the High Court reduced the said sentence to one week.
The appellant has undergone the said sentence.
The appellant filed an appeal and the appeal was allowed by the District Collector on 21.8.1993.
The appellant approached the Administrative Tribunal which dismissed his application on 2.8.99 and the said order was companyfirmed by the High Court on 11.8.99 in writ petition.
In the disciplinary enquiry in relation to certain other charges referred to above, the appellant was removed from service on 25.12.1978 as stated above However, it appears that later the appellant was reinstated on 14.3.1980.
There was also a criminal case in companynection with an incident in which the appellant is said to have attested a loan form which was presented by another person impersonating as one of the villagers.
This appeal is filed against the said order of the High Court.
Leave granted.
J. Rao and S.V. Patil, JJ.
The Village Officers posts were abolished with effect from 6.1.1984 but the appellant was companytinued on the post till new recruitments were made under the 1990 Rules.
The appellant, who was working as a Village Officer, before the abolition of the hereditary village offices, was suspended from service in 1976 and ultimately removed on 25.12.1978.
