CHARGE No.
Further you exercised financial 2Page powers number vested with you.
CHARGE No.
01190077112 maintained at Sector 22, Chandigarh branch through the account of Shri Sant Ram.
CHARGE No.
01190077112 maintained at Sector 22, Chandigarh Branch, through the accounts of Shri Hira Pal, a part time Sweeper, who has alleged that he has number requested for purchase of any cheque in DD and further alleged that you got blank cheques signed by him drawn on his CC SBF A c No.48.
Shri A.K. Sharma, SMGS IV was appointed as an Inquiring Authority in terms of Rule 68 2 ii of the State Bank of India Officers Service Rules for short the Rules .
1Page CHARGE No.
The Respondent filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh questioning the legality of the order of dismissal.
CHARGE No.
6 and 8, the explanation submitted by the Respondent and 3Page the bio data of the Respondent to the Appointing Authority.
You have thus violated Rule 50 3 50 4 of State Bank of India Officers Service Rules.
The Disciplinary Authority disagreed with the findings of the Inquiring Authority qua Charge Nos.
The judgment of the learned Single Judge was affirmed by a Division Bench.
The Disciplinary Authority was number empowered to impose a major penalty as per Rule 66 3 iii of the Rules.
1, 2, 4, 5 and 7 were proved, Charge No.
The Appointing Authority by an Order dated 22 nd January, 2000 companysidered the entire material which was sent to him and imposed a penalty of removal from service on the Respondent.
The order of removal was set aside by a Single Judge of the High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh.
CHARGE No.
3 and 8 were number proved.
1 You availed Demand Loans fraudulently under fake signatures of the depositors owners of the STDRs.
The Respondent submitted his explanation to the findings of the Inquiring Authority as well as the disagreement of the Disciplinary Authority regarding Charge Nos.
He transmitted the entire record which companytained the findings of the Inquiring Authority, reasons of disagreement regarding Charge Nos.
6 and 8.
6 was partly proved and Charge Nos.
6 and 8.
The companyrectness of the judgment of the High Court is challenged in this Appeal.
A companyy of the Report of the Inquiring Authority along with reasons for the disagreement was forwarded to the Respondent.
You also caused delay in payment of these DDs.
CHARGE No.
Articles of Charges framed against the Respondent when he was working as an Officer MMGS II are as follows CHARGE No.
2 You closed certain Demand Loans granted at the branch before the date of inspection and reopened the same on the same day with a view to avoid inspection of securities charged to Demand Loans.
3 Certain fraudulent Demand Loans availed by you, were liquidated out of proceeds of cheques purchased by you, drawn on your personal Savings Bank A c No.
4 You availed ACC Loans fraudulently under take signatures and without supporting revenue records to justify quantum of loan.
5 Certain fraudulent ACC Loan availed by you, were liquidated out of proceeds of cheques purchased by you, drawn on your savings Bank Account No.
6 You got purchased your personal cheques in DD at Karnal Branch, without keeping sufficient balance in your account.
7 You purchased cheques of heavy amount drawn on your personal savings Bank A c in the accounts of Shri Hira Pal, a part time sweeper and Shri Sant Ram Sharma, without keeping sufficient balance in your account.
8 Your account shows transactions of heavy amounts, which are much above your known sources of income.
NAGESWARA RAO, J. Leave granted.
The Respondent who was working in the Appellant Bank was removed from service.
A detailed Inquiry was held and the Inquiring Authority companycluded that the Charge Nos.
