IN ?H€ HISH COURT OF KARNATAKA c:R¢$;f73$mga
R? GULB%fiGA ' . ~.*.":r
DATED THIS THE 2?" DR?-OE §EBé3§R?;f2@G9 ;'
9RgéaN§°"
Tag HGN'BLE M§{3usTic3_v;Q;g£BHAHi?
3N§_ ' aT §
THE aoN*3Lg.MR.;33¢§c§, AJS}PAC3%A§URE
WRET A9§aA;.§g;ja4322¢e3 (L~TER§
gaTwE§N:4f- ""
S G HhvaIdar}~' WV' w 5
Age ahofifi fijéyeéxs,
OCQ:;Caté:ingpSé:?iCé,
R/a;Cfo.H_BfiBjradér;
Ashirwadvguiiazngg
Near BEA $h3V3fi,T
x§p§: B D"fi_off:ce,
w_ gyiyekmggar {East},
';3Bijapgr&586 Z09.
_', ;;A§§ELLANT
A E§y S$i:§apugawda Siddappa, fidv.)
iu The Management of
Mfs.Sangli Bank Lt6.,
Ragresented by its
Hamager, ?ersGnnel and
DP & V Qepot,
Rafiwad Chowk, ,'= _T;
Sangli-416 élé (Maharasht:as$t3téh
?. Industriai Credit and_Envestmfintxvf;'_
Cerpozation of Indian Bank étdjgy, ,_
Regd. Qffice, Land Mark} J " ""
Race Caurse €i:¢le,*
Vad0dara--390 097k
Reprasented by 1:3» ._ =9 ;
Management. _" q xx .¢_,.RES?ODENTS
{By 351 Shivakufi@r S Badéflafiaqi, Adv. far R2}
?hi$vW.£. is~fiiefi,undef7Sec:iQn 4 of the
High Coast} Agtfl Ǥrayifiq_mio set aside tha
judqmafit $fid~0r§e§ ¢a:ec,27.9.2oo7 passed by
tba :ea;ndws:h§;é.gudge-3;: W.P.No.2027f2QG3
{LwTER§and etc; *' 3
, :Thié f8fi§$é3 %coming on for preliminary
hearing 'today; *$&BHAHIT, J delivered the
fll':~;~m;:=§ :" _ A = "
H ' _ . . . .
"p ?h:§ éppeal £3 filed by the petitionar ix
w.?;§fi;2G27/2GG3 baimg aggrieved by the Qxdez
*:,w%efein the Rearmed Singlé Judge has cenfirmed
'£h$ finding sf the Labour Ceurt that the
Charge against the appellant for having
s
misapprapriatea the amount off R5;22Q§§Of%by
fglsifying tha accaufita- in _the% Bénfifi and"
modifying the penalty Efrem ,diSmi$saI, sf
servica ta compu1éQ%y_reE::gmefi: 5&1? fox the
purpase sf te;mina;~$§§éfifis'fiillwéhe date of
dismissal af Etg§A ¢§fi§fi%fi§Keafid his terminal
ben@fits "§nd Wfii€a§t§é t$fit hi5 terminal
benefififi Be séttléfi in accordance with law.
;2.,Tޤ g@tificn@r~ appellant herain was
work:g§Vaé_é1
Disciplinary £athar:ty dism:3sefi Eh@ a§péEl§§t
from service by cmdexmdated ;Q2§£998;VW TfiéW
app§lla§t raised a diafiufié"$ef¢§e_théT€én:ralA
Govarnmeat lndustfial ?rib§n§l?CumwLab0ur
Court, Banqaigre, Vinf-CR NGQlOi/S? and the
Labou; Court §éid *:&a: th$ ki©mestic enquiry
hel& by the degéftfieht wag fair and progar and
the ¢ha;@é_jdfj_$isa$g:opriation against the
appeilani'V§§d. ©¢efi=-§;§ved and he had also
d.s;;;os§,tVeic:'v.'j'V-,a;"~,g:;:::s;""-of" Rs.22,00f3/- and Ezaving
regard V:d _£fie'fEact that the appallant was
_$érving in¢'the Bank. and that the charge of
'x,mi3apgf@priatiQn ayf amaunt and falsification
"L;f"t%&_aé¢Qu§ts havé been proved, the Gfdéf sf
E§is&is$&l wag jugtified. and accerdingiy,
. d:3mis5@d Ehe referance by' ordar dated
'"3G.§.2GO2. Eaing agqxievaé by{ said $rder
passad by the ?resid:ng Officar Qf the Central
W;/K
Government Industrial Tribunalfivand Labcmr
Ceurt, Bangalcre, the épp@Zlamt &erai§ iilédk
writ §etit:on~ W.P;§Qi$§27f:Q§B="§%d Rthe
learned Single Jud§&:éfte£ h§a§in§ %fiés;ea§fied
counaei for vthg Qetéfiifiheg %fid"'%%e iearneé
aoungel for £hé f§%§cfi§é5§é _held that the
findimg.§f,tfi§W¢§fit%$@ G§fe;nment Industrial
TribqA§§{fi%flQQf 31€Q§§{k.,that the domestic
enqaéfi§flx$%$a §§i%A é£@;3§f9per and that th@
cfiargé'§£ %fi$a§§%§§riati0n sf Rs.22,GSOf-- and
§a:s£~;f:%:;.at'j_g_;y2._;>':%..~"%:%:e accounts in that beéwlf
«had been groyefi wa$, justified. However, tha
' g§§gfH€d 'Sifigl& Judge msdified tha order of
§ismiS33l impoged upem the writ petiti$mer and
hgifi that having regard to the facta 0f the
" §3$é, it wag a fit case far Gompulgary
ratirement instemi of dismissai fram service
1?'r~.{ ~\:{\,\a>\';");u' V,
ané £3 fiwdifi&§Lé§d accordingly, allowed the
L4
writ petitiee in part and 'fiieeVeifiee ef
diemieeele ie moéifiedg id »ana:, efV cempuleefiyu
retirement only fer tee eg}ea§¢gfef"§é:e;ea:
benefits :11; they S of é:he
Claimant and hi? téfmefieihgenefite be settled
in secerdaece 91:5 gee; éeefig aggrieved by the
said Ofidég gf fie: g¢é£:sgW;é1de the order of
diemiesei "eQd"gQ:deeiag. reinstatement, this
s~.«-
wr t-gppeefiyisViileflT"""
*3, We-hexekhearé fihe learned ceunsei for
_ fihe agpeiient and the learned ceunsel fer the
wreepeedeete.
v7a4. Tee Eeerned eeuneel for the eppeliaet
A;'vehememiiy argued that the chazge egainet the
eppelian: had met been greved and the erder
paeeed by" the Centre} Gevermment Induetriel
W=m='~
accordanca with law which is aéuravefi b_1 the
1.
33.. 35 V
Laban: Coart and the Lgaxnedf Sifi§lg V£Q&gé has’
modified the order 3fW dismissal _t$” thfifi. ¢§A
cQmpulsQry’ retiremeflfiV §nl%* for_’figéfl pur@0ses* cf
terminal beaefits frq%Vfihe_§a§e Q? §ismis$al of
the claimant afi$ wh%raf§f€{ §h§ afifiéliant is not
entitied ts any fg§£hé%AfeiE%f;@*;
B: flWQr”$av§¥ g£§efi:ufigféfui consideration t0
the m£@%¢éKgféUS zéf fi§éW iearned counsel for the
§arties’a§duS:rutinj§ed the material on r@Cord.
‘~6. TKe materiai an record wouid cleariy $h0w
“X3th§fix.€fiép appellant was working as a alezk in
S§fig§; 3$fi% which is naw mergefi with ECECE Bank,
“tfiagflreégondent NQ.2 in tfié writ getitien.
TSCru€iny’ 0f the material on record wauld also
*,3§ow[ that the domestic enquiry’ was heid after
affwrding appartanifiy t@ thé appeilant in
accardance with law afid tha same has been held ta
‘ya/K
be fair ané prmpar by tha Labsfif V€Qfififi. Th@
appellant has depssitéd_a§_gm0§fifi éf R§,fi3,fiQO{~;¢
which ha %ad misapprogriafiéfi, “ifi’ view ,df the
finding ia the domeétig afiquixy wfii¢fi~has been up
held by tize Labeur ” fincziing in
the writ peti£i&n.7i1§t is :élear that the said
finding on the q§éfi§i§%:o§,fé%fi is, jastified aad
does nGt’CaIl far iaierferéfice»
. ”” *7,WEHffihaf; th@ Iéarned Singie Jadge haviag
régard ‘to 3fié= facfi3 and circumstaaces wf thé
ca3e;* has ‘mQd;fi§fi the crder of §enalty from
_fiismi3sal”ato Que Qf cGmpuls0ry[ reiirement only
V” rfn§ :héa purpose Gf terminal benefits till the
‘ &afié”,ofQ*fl:smissai af the ciaimant and hafi
‘diréétefi tfiat the tarminal benefits be aettlad ifi
ac@Qfdance with law. %ai having regard ta the
xv-« ‘cued; Qt.-
=_féct that the appaiiant was wcrking and has been
\
foufid guilty of the charge sf misappropriation of
tE@ amaunt :9 the time of Rs.22,9Q$f~ and there
\’/CW/g
ID
is 3 conaurrent finding and that–§%vi$§ ;e§§r5 is
the nature aad gravity3»Gf t§%fl §$é;§a ia$fi 2th§
nature empioymeat sf tfia §ppéiEafitE;§;éh§ gawk;
it is ciear that t&§ épp%iian§ ;QQ3iq} got* be
entitlafi to any fu§§h§:– raiief1Lafi§ the ardef
passed by the é¢arfiédJ§1ggi§~Qhdge is justified
and dwes not 5u§§¢;_ffé§ 3nf %;§br oz iliegaiity.
Hence, 3&5 fire dhkfi i§Ci§§@§ fifiy take 51 different
Viewiififitfié @a£fé$ afi§V§§dérdingly, we hold that
the a§pea€B;i;%§de§0§d §fw fierit and §as3 the
f0iiGfiifig:crfl§§i}§ .a W h
The &ppaai is fiififiissed.
x