1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR. LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.214 OF 2008. in Writ petition No.2619 of 2007 (decided). Purushottam Nilkanthrao Zade .vs. Sarswat Cooperative Bank Ltd. and another. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. Coram: ANOOP V. MOHTA and C.L.PANGARKAR, JJ. Dated : 28th JULY, 2008. 1. Heard Shri Palikundwar, Advocate for the appellant. 2. The appellant, after due enquiry conducted and further based upon the material available on record was terminated. All the courts maintained the said order. The learned Single Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition by observing as under - 2 “The misconduct of grave nature involving financial implication and misappropriation have been found to be proved by the Enquiry Officer and those findings are maintained by the Labour Court in ULPN Complaint and by the Industrial Court in Revision filed under Section 44 of MRTU & PULP Act. In these circumstances, the scope of jurisdiction available to this court in present writ petition is very limited. Considering the graveness of the misconduct proved, it cannot be said that the punishment imposed upon the petitioner is shockingly disproportionate and the instances of other employees sought to be pressed into service by present petitioner are totally irrelevant looking to the nature of misconduct. Similarly, as the present misconduct is itself grave enough to warrant punishment as inflicted, the contention that the past service record has not been looked into is totally irrelevant”. 3 In view of this, no case is made out to interfere in the present Letters Patent Appeal. Hence, it is dismissed. JUDGE. JUDGE. chute