COURT NO.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) 1001/2001 (Old No. 46141/1999) Devendra Singh Sirkoti ..........Petitioner Versus The Secretary, Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. And Others ..........Respondents Sri Vipul Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner. None for the respondents. 4th April, 2008 Hon'ble P.C. Verma, J. Heard Sir Vipul Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner. None appeared on behalf of the respondents despite notice. 2. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the termination order dated 28.6.1999, which reads as under: The Charge of embezzlement of Rupees one lakh from Dhan Laxmi Accounts of the bank has been proved against Sri Devendra Sirkoti and he has been informed in writing on 22.5.99 according to the direction of administrator and he has been declared doubtful in future. On 18.6.99 I was out of station in connection with bank's business and at the same time I was informed that your mother is very serious. I went to admit her in the hospital and during that period Sri Devendra Sirkoti was in -charge bank's main cashier and clerk. He deposited only Rs. 8 lakhs in the account of Sri Mahaveer Singh against a cheque of Rs. 9,40,000/- submitted by Smt. Babita and embezzled the rest amount of Rs. 1,40,000/-, which amount today on 28.6.99 as per the statement of Sri Mahaveer Singh Rawat has been embezzled by not depositing in his account. Since Sri Devendra Sirkoti was already doubtful person for the bank's business and information to this effect has ready been communicated to the staff members but on that day most of the staff were on leave, therefore, Sri Devendra Sirkoti embezzled the said amount of Rs. 1,40,000/- by diplomacy and without permission to the account holder and as per the account holder the branch of the bank has become doubtful. Therefore, the services of Sri Devendra Sirkoti are terminated with immediate effect, who after the embezzlement left the bank leaving aside the work which proves the doubtfulness of embezzlement. I was present in the headquarters. There is no application for leave in the office. Therefore, Sri Devendra Sirkoti deposit the embezzled amount of Rs. 1,40,000/- in the bank within two days of receipt of this letter otherwise lodging of F.I.R. regarding embezzlement is necessary. The letter regarding doubtfulness of his work as per the direction of the Administrator was received by him personally on 24.5.99 while he was present in the bank. Sd/- Secretary/General Manager Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd. Tehri Garhwal 3. The impugned order of termination cannot sustain in the eye of law for two reasons, firstly, that the order is punitive in nature and has been passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner which is evident from the reading of the impugned order itself and secondly, the order has been passed by the Secretary of the bank who is not competent to pass the order. The appointing authority is Administrative Committee under clause (a) of Rule 7 of U.P. Co-operative Banks Centralized Service Rules, 1976. The constitution of Administrative Committee is provided in clause (b) of Rule 4 of the said rules. 4. Since the order has been passed by an authority who is not competent to pass it and punitive order has been passed without affording any opportunity which entails civil consequence, therefore, the impugned order dated 28.6.1999 is hereby quashed. Writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma,J.) Prabodh