171 of 2006 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant preferred against the judgment and order dated 20.04.2006 of the Single Judge of the High Court in Writ Petition No.
The appellant also claimed that the NPA of the Branch fell down from 57 lakhs to 20 lakhs.
In response to the said Scheme, the Bank received 7600 applications as against 6000.
171 of 2006 before the High Court.
After passing of the order of punishment, the Chief Regional Manager accepted the appellants application for voluntary retirement by letter dated 19.06.2001.
In order to appreciate the issue involved in this appeal, it is necessary to set out the relevant facts in brief infra.
Challenging the said order, the appellant preferred writ petition being W.P. No.3842 of 2002 before the High Court.
The next submission of the learned companynsel for the appellant that since the appellant had unblemished career throughout in his service period, the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the appellant were number called for and deserve to be quashed also have numbersubstance.
In this way, the appellant stood retired from the services of Bank w.e.f.
The appellant claimed that due to his good performance, his Branch won the award of Best Branch of the Year.
By order dated 20.03.2001, the Chief Manager, Dewas Branch and Disciplinary Authority, passed an order awarding the companysolidated penalty of reduction in the pay of the appellant by five stages in the time scale for a period of 3 years and on the expiry of such period, the reduction was to have the effect of postponing the future increments of his pay to the extent in terms of Regulation No.4 1 of Bank of India Officer Employees Discipline Appeal Regulations, 1976 in short the Regulations .
The Division Bench of the High Court by impugned order dated 09.05.2007 dismissed the appeal and upheld the findings of the Single Judge.
3842 of 2002 by which the Single Judge dismissed the writ petition of the appellant wherein the challenge was to the order dated 20.03.2001 passed by the Chief Manager, Bank of India respondent No.3 herein imposing the punishment of reduction of his basic pay by five stages on the appellant.
The Single Judge of the High Court by order dated 20.04.2006, dismissed the writ petition.
According to the appellant, during his tenure, the profits of the said Branch were increased from 2 lakhs to 30 lakhs, deposits were increased from 6 crores to 11 crores and advances were increased from 2 crores to 4 crores.
By order dated 21.06.2002, the Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal.
6000 extra employees.
On 01.11.2000, the respondent Bank announced Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2000 in short Scheme with a view to lay off approx.
The details of several irregularities alleged to have been companymitted by the appellant were mentioned in the memo.
The appellant filed his reply on 13.03.2001 to the charge sheet and accepted all the charges companytained therein unconditionally.
On 08.09.2000, a memo was issued by the Chief Regional Manager, Bank of India, Jabalpur to the appellant mentioning therein that during his tenure as Manager of Panagar Branch, certain irregularities lapses were reported in disbursement of loans.
The appellant also applied for voluntary retirement on 16.11.2000.
Accordingly, offers were made to the staff in general for opting voluntary retirement pursuant to the Scheme on or before 31.12.2000.
The appellant on 05.01.2001 was informed that his application is in the process.
The charges were in relation to the irregularities which were mentioned in the memo dated 08.09.2000.
The relevant para of the punishment order reads as under The acts of misconduct companymitted by you are serious in nature but keeping in view facts and circumstances of the case, I have decided to take a lenient view in the matter and to impose upon you Consolidated Major Penalty of reduction in pay by five stages in a time scale for a period of three years with the further direction that you will number earn your numbermal increments of pay during the period of such reduction and reduction will have the effect of postponing your future increments to that extent in terms of clause 4 f of Bank Of India Officer Employees Discipline and Appeal Regulations, 1976.
Against the order of the Single Judge, the appellant filed an intra companyrt appeal being W.A. No.
The appellant was asked to submit his reply.
Being aggrieved by the said order of punishment, the appellant preferred a departmental appeal before the Zonal Manager, Bank of India, Ujjain Zone.
Suffice it to say, once the appellant admitted the charges, appropriate punishment as prescribed in the Rules companyld be inflicted on him.
He was posted as Branch Manager, Panagar Branch, Jabalpur Region from 04.07.1996 to 26.05.1999.
It was for the Appointing Authority to have taken into account the seriousness of the charge and overall performance of the appellant while imposing punishment.
On 18.10.2000, the appellant submitted his reply to the Chief Regional Manager, Jabalpur.
Heard Mr. Mehul M. Gupta, learned companynsel for the appellant and Mr. S. Gopakumaran Nair, learned senior companynsel for the respondents.
The appellant was an employee of the Bank of India.
It was done by the authorities companycerned in this case as would be clear from mere perusal of the punishment order.
On 02.03.2001, the appellant was served with the charge sheet.
Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant employee has preferred this appeal by way of special leave before this Court.
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 09.05.2007 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Writ Appeal No.
