General Manager (Operation1)/Appellate Authority, UCO Bank & Ors. Vs. Krishna Kumar Bhardwaj sc of india
Employee While depositing huge amount of Bank’s cash in the currency chest branch at Meerut, he did not follow the procedure laid down in the Bank’s Manual of Instructions (Cash) and also deviated from the past practice followed by the branch for such cash remittances. He thus failed to discharge his duties with utmost honesty, integrity, diligence and devotion. This was violation of Regulation (3) of UCO Bank Officers Employees’ (Conduct) Regulations, 1976.
After the inquiry was conducted in terms of the procedure prescribed under the scheme of Regulations 1976, the inquiry officer finally held the respondent guilty for charge nos. 1,2 and 3 and charge no. 4 was not found to be proved. The disciplinary authority, after affording opportunity of hearing and after due compliance of the principles of natural justice, confirmed the finding recorded by the inquiry officer in his report dated 30th September, 1995 held the respondent delinquent guilty and imposed punishment vide Order dated 12th August, 1996.
5. The extract of order of the disciplinary authority dated 12th August,1996 is as under:-
“Now, in exercise of the powers conferred upon me by UCO Bank Officer Employees (Discipline & Appeal) Regulation 1976, I hereby award the following penalties upon Shri KK Bhardwaj in terms of Regulation4 of the said regulation:
| 1. Charge No. 1 | Proved : | Reduction to lowest stage in the present time scale. |
| 2. Charge No. 2 | Proved : | Reduction to lowest stage in the present time scale, i.e. the Basic pay be reduced to Rs.2100/-( in the old Scale) |
| 3. Charge No. 3 | Proved: | If any claim is raised against the Bank by the Income Tax Deptt. it be recovered from the retiral benefits of Mr. Bhardwaj, as admissible to him, as per Bank’s rules. |
| 4. Charge No. 4 | .. Not proved” |
6. On appeal being preferred, the appellate authority while upholding the guilt in reference to charge nos. 1,2 and 3 modified the punishment by an Order dated 14th November, 1998. The relevant part is as under:-
| ” Charge No. 1 … Proved .. | The Basic pay of Shri Bhardwaj be reduced by 13 stages from Rs.3660/to Rs. 2100 (Old Scale, revised Rs.4250/) plus increments for passing CAFIB (if any allowed) in the tire scale of pay for a period of 2 years w.e.f. 12.8.96. He will earn increments of pay during the period of reduction and that on the expiry of this period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing his future increments of pay. |
| Charge No. 2 … do | do |
| Charge No. 3 do | do |
| Charge No. 4 .. Not proved | … Exonerated. |
| All the punishments will have a concurrent effect.” |
We have gone through the record of inquiry with the assistance of learned counsel and, in our considered view, the finding which has been recorded by the inquiry officer in reference to charge nos. 1,2 and 3 is duly supported with the material on record and after revisiting the record of inquiry, has been confirmed by the disciplinary/appellate authority. At the same time, while upholding the guilt of the respondent delinquent, the appellate authority took a lenient view and modified the punishment by an Order dated 14th November, 1998.
In our considered view, the premises on which the High Court has proceeded even in reference to charge no. 1 is unsustainable and deserves to be set aside.
SC of India allowed the appeal in favor of bank.