LPA No. 145 of 2004 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. LPA No. 145 of 2004 (O&M) Date of Decision: 05.03.2010 Ranbir Singh ....Appellant. Versus Bank of India and others ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. Ramesh Goyat, Advocate for the appellant. ... Alok Singh, J. CM 822-LPA of 2010 For the reasons shown, CM is allowed. Ordered dated 3.2.2010 is recalled. LPA is restored to its original number. LPA No.145 of 2004. Heard on merits. By way of present appeal, the appellant is assailing order of learned Single Judge dated 6.5.2002 whereby the writ petition against the order passed by the punishing authority as well as the appellate authority dismissing the petitioner from service on the ground of embezzlement done LPA No. 145 of 2004 2 by the petitioner while he was posted as Clerk-cum-Cashier in Bank of India. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was working as Clerk-cum-Cashier in Bank of India. He was issued charge-sheet dated 26.10.1995 wherein allegation was levelled against the appellant that he had misappropriated some amount out of Rs.5200/- collected from one Parkash Singh and issued him a false counterfoil. He submitted reply to the charge sheet. Thereafter, enquiry officer was appointed, who gave his report dated 2.6.1996 holding the appellant guilty of the charges levelled against him. Thereafter, the appellant was dismissed from service vide order dated 14.11.1996. Appeal was filed by the appellant before the appellate authority against the aforesaid order. The appeal was also dismissed vide order dated 31.1.1997. Order dated 31.1.1997 was impugned by filing writ petition, which was also dismissed by learned Single Judge vide order dated 6.5.2002. Present appeal has been filed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 6.5.2002. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. Disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority found the appellant guilty of embezzlement while he was working in the bank. Officer/official of the bank acts as trustee for depositors/clients. If he commits an act of embezzlement, he is guilty of not only criminal offence but also the breach of trust imposed by the depositors in the bank and its officials. A person who is guilty of embezzlement needs not be shown any sympathy or latitude on any ground including the ground of hypertechnicalities. LPA No. 145 of 2004 3 In view of the above, we are not inclined to interfere with the view taken by learned Single Judge. Dismissed. ( Alok Singh ) Judge ( Adarsh Kumar Goel ) Judge 05.03.2010 sk.