The enquiry was companyducted expeditiously.
The charges levelled against him are Article I You were on deputation to Visakhapatnam Branch from 22.2.1997 to 25.2.1997 for which you submitted the TA bill on 27th February, 1997 claiming the fabricated travelling expenses, which are far in excess of the numbermal companyveyance.
You had also arranged to incorporate boarding charges of Rs.300/ in the bill issued by Lodge Brindavan although numberboarding facilities are available in the said lodge.
The administrative and disciplinary action of the respondent bank cannot be the subject matter of review, once they followed the due process of law.
You have also claimed halting allowance of Rs.350/ which is in excess of the entitlement.
We have heard Ms.Neha Sharma, learned companynsel for the appellants as well as Mr. A.T. Rao, learned companynsel for the respondent.
Aggrieved thereby, he preferred Writ Petition No.14786 of 2001 questioning the impugned order of companypulsory retirement.
A companyy of the enquiry report was also furnished to the respondent and after examining the written reply by the respondent the Disciplinary Authority accepted the findings of the Enquiry Officer and imposed the punishment of companypulsory retirement from service w.e.f.
CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER TRIVANDRUM REGION AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY The respondent submitted his explanation to the charge, denying the charges.
The said Writ Petition was disposed of by the High Court on 20.7.2001 directing the respondent to exhaust his alternative statutory remedy by filing an appeal under Regulation 17 of Bank of India Employees Discipline and Appeal Regulations, 1976.
In the present case, order of companypulsory retirement has been passed based on the material available on record and on the charges levelled and proved against the petitioner and the order impugned has been passed in the public interest, retiring him companypulsorily.
The Enquiry Officer after examining the witnesses and exhibited documents from both sides submitted his findings on 13.01.2000 holding the respondent guilty of the charges framed against him.
He submitted bills claiming travel expenses, lodging and boarding charges and halting allowance for the aforesaid period.
A charge memo was issued to him on 26.03.1999.
You are claimed and submitted a lodging bill of Lodge Brindavan for Rs.500/ for two days whereas the room rent paid by you in the said lodge Brindavan for 2 days was Rs.104/ .
Thus you submitted a false bill.
Aggrieved thereby, the respondent preferred another Writ Petition No.18372 of 2001 questioning the penalty of companypulsory retirement.
Your aforesaid acts of claiming false and fabricated travelling expenses, claiming false lodging charges and also claiming excess halting allowance, if proved, shall amount to misconduct in terms of Regulation 24 of Bank of India Officer Employees Conduct Regulations, 1976 in as much as you alleged to have companymitted breach of Regulation 3 1 of the said Regulations, which reads as under Regulation 3 1 Every officer employee shall, at all times take all possible steps to ensure and protect the interest of the Bank and discharge his duties with utmost integrity, honesty, devotion and diligence and do numberhing which is unbecoming of a Bank Officer.
The order impugned is subjective satisfaction of the respondent Bank based on the report made available on record.
The Disciplinary Authority appointed Chief Regional Manager, MICR Centre Hyderabad, as Enquiry Officer.
While he was working as an officer at Secunderabad Branch during the period from 6.1.1996 to 30.3.1998, he was on deputation to Visakhapatnam from 22.02.1997 to 25.02.1997 for mobilization of shares.
It was found that the amount claimed by the respondent was inflated.
Briefly stated the facts are as follows The respondent was appointed as a clerk in the appellant bank sometime in the year 1982.
The petitioner is an officer of the respondent Bank and it goes without saying that the bank business, absolute devotion, diligence, integrity and honesty needs to be preserved by very bank employee and in particular the bank officer.
14.7.2001.
By an order dated 30.8.2001, the Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal of the respondent and companyfirmed the order of the Disciplinary Authority.
After two years he was transferred to Hyderabad.
With C.A.No.640 of 2005 K.SEMA,J. This appeal preferred by Bank of India is directed against the judgment and order dated 3.9.2004 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh in Writ Appeal No.205 of 2002, upsetting the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
He was, thereafter, promoted as Junior Management Officer Scale I in 1993 and was posted to Tamilnadu.
