You are accused of misconduct.
Thereafter, the Appellant filed an appeal which was dismissed by the Appellate Authority.
A Sub Committee was companystituted by the Board of Directors and it was held by the Committee that the charges of misconduct against the Appellant did number warrant the penalty of dismissal from service.
The Disciplinary Authority, in companypliance with the order of the High Court, reconsidered the matter and reiterated the penalty of reduction of 15 stages lower in time scale of pay for a period of eight years.
The recommendation made by the Committee was accepted by the Board of Directors and the punishment suggested by the Committee was imposed by the Board of Directors on 10.09.2012.
The said appeal was dismissed by the Board of Directors by an order dated 24.03.2005.
Later, the Disciplinary Authority modified the punishment of reduction to 10 stages increments lower in time scale of pay for a period of six years with further direction that the officer shall number earn the increments of pay during the period of said reduction and on expiry of such period, the reduction shall have the effect of postponing the future increments on his pay.
The Board of Directors dismissed the appeal on reconsideration.
The High Court was of the opinion that the charges framed against the Appellant were fully proved and the imposition of penalty by the order dated 29.10.2015 was 5 Page companymensurate with the delinquency of the Appellant as the penalty imposed on the Appellant was number shockingly disproportionate.
The Appellant filed a Writ Petition challenging the order of dismissal which was number entertained by the High Court.
By an order dated 05.07.2004, the Appellant was dismissed from service without any benefits under Regulation No.38 kha 4 of Muzaffarnagar Kshetriya Gramin Bank Modified Officer and Staff Services Regulations, 2010 hereinafter, the Regulations .
The Appellant was placed under suspension by an order dated 29.07.2003.
He challenged the order of suspension by filing a Writ Petition which was disposed of with a direction to the bank to companyplete the inquiry within four months.
The High Court set aside the order passed by the Board of Directors on 24.03.2005 and remanded the matter back to the Board of Directors to companysider the appeal filed by the Appellant afresh.
Another reply was submitted by the 2 Page Appellant on 23.06.2004.
The Appellant was successful in his challenge against the order passed by the Board of Directors dismissing his appeal before the High Court.
The Appellant retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2012.
Liberty was given to the Appellant to file an appeal.
The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad refused to grant reinstatement.
The charges that were framed against the Appellant are You did number companyply the directions and regulations of Head Office.
4 Page The penalty of reduction of pay of 15 stages was challenged by the Appellant by filing a Writ Petition.
The Inquiry Officer submitted the inquiry report on 23.12.2003 to the Disciplinary Authority.
An opportunity was given to the Appellant to submit his remarks on the inquiry report.
The High Court upheld the order passed by the Appellate Authority by dismissing the Writ Petition filed by the Appellant.
You have worked against the interest of Bank Injurious work, you was unauthorised absent.
A reply was submitted by the Appellant on 11.06.2004, which was companysidered by the Disciplinary Authority.
You are isolated for the interest of Bank and to your duties.
A Writ Petition filed against the 3 Page order of the Board of Directors dismissing the appeal second time was allowed and the Appellate Authority was directed to apply its mind to the quantum of punishment and pass a fresh order.
The Appellant submitted his reply to the said charge sheets dated 27.05.2003 and 30.05.2003.
Thereafter, a show cause numberice was issued to the Appellant to explain as to why he should number be dismissed from service.
Pursuant to the liberty granted by the High Court, the Appellant submitted an appeal against the order of the Disciplinary Authority dismissing him from service to the Board of Directors, Muzaffaragar Kshetriya Gramin Bank.
You have made effort to diffuse the Bank image and on the basis of it your worked that injurious to the health of Bank.
On 27.05.2003, he was served with a charge sheet and was asked to submit his reply within a period of fifteen days.
1 Page Yet another charge sheet was issued on 30.05.2003 in which the following charges were framed You have violated discipline of bank.
NAGESWARA RAO, J. The Appellant worked as an officer of Regional Rural Bank Services with the Muzaffarnagar Kshetriya Gramin Bank hereinafter, the Bank .
