Bank told to reinstate staff dismissed on graft charge

The Madras High Court has come to the rescue of a bank employee, who was dismissed/removed from service on the charge of misappropriation of funds, by quashing the punishment and directing the State Bank of India to reinstate him in service.

Published: 16th October 2013 04:01 PM  |   Last Updated: 16th October 2013 04:01 PM   |  A+A-

The Madras High Court has come to the rescue of a bank employee, who was dismissed/removed from service on the charge of misappropriation of funds, by quashing the punishment and directing the State Bank of India (SBI) to reinstate him in service.

Justice D Hariparanthaman directed the SBI to reinstate the petitioner with 50 percent back wages with continuity in service and attendant benefits, while allowing a writ petition from S Chandrasekaran, last week.

While petitioner was working as a clerk in Ramanathapuram branch in 2004, a charge sheet was issued against him alleging that he had misappropriated Rs 10,000 belonging to a customer for his personal benefit. Pursuant to an enquiry, he was dismissed from service. On his appeal, the punishment was modified as removal from service. Thereafter, he approached the Tribunal, which held that his removal from service was justified. According to petitioner, on January 27, 2004, while he was busy in his work, a cover addressed to S Chandrasekar, SBI, Ramanathapuram branch was delivered to him by a courier service agent. The courier contained a foreign draft for Rs 10,000 favouring S Chandrasekar without any other enclosure. He was the only person available at the branch under the name of S Chandrasekar at that time.

Since he received a foreign remittance on an earlier occasion from his relative Kumaresan, who also assured through his letters to send further remittances, he presumed that the remittance was intended only for him. Thereafter he learnt from Kumaresan that he sent no such remittance. When he contacted the courier agent, he was informed that the cover was wrongly addressed.  Soon, he arranged to remit back the amount to the correct beneficiary through the courier agent. The unintentional lapse was unfortunately misconstrued as an act of mala fide, he contended. Allowing the petition, the judge observed that CAT had not considered certain vital aspects including the deposition of petitioner’s relative Kumaresan.

Stay up to date on all the latest Chennai news with The New Indian Express App. Download now
(Get the news that matters from New Indian Express on WhatsApp. Click this link and hit 'Click to Subscribe'. Follow the instructions after that.)

Comments

Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the newindianexpress.com editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on newindianexpress.com are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of newindianexpress.com or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. newindianexpress.com reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp