IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2010 / 22ND ASHADHA 1932 WA.No. 1096 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.24329/1998 .................... APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER :- ------------------------------------------ C.N.PRABHAKARAN, CHEMPANPURAYIDATHIL, RAJAKKAD, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS :- ----------------------------------------------- 1. THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, IDUKKI, ELAPPARA. 2. THE RAJAKKAD SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., NO.342 RAJAKKAD PO, IDUKKI DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.V.V.RAJA FOR R2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jvt A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.A. No.1096 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of July 2010 J U D G M E N T A.K.Basheer, J. Appellant was dismissed from the service of respondent No.2, Co-Operative Bank after holding an enquiry in which he was found guilty of all the four charges levelled against him. The finding of the enquiry officer was accepted by the management and appellant was dismissed from service with effect from May 25, 1998. 2. Appellant raised an industrial dispute which was referred for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal. Appellant and the management adduced evidence before the Tribunal in support of their rival contentions. The Tribunal passed Ext.P3 award holding the appellant guilty of one out of the four charges levelled against him. The proven charge was that the appellant, while he was working W.A. No.1096 of 2010 -: 2 :- as Assistant Secretary in the Bank, had forged loan documents in the name of five members of the Bank and availed of loan in their name and misappropriated the amounts. In fact, it came out in evidence that the appellant had admitted his guilt in writing before the management. But later he contended that he had done so because of threat and coercion. The Tribunal held that the punishment of dismissal from service imposed by the management on the appellant did not warrent any interference, since the charge proved against him was very grave. 3. The above award was challenged by the appellant before the learned Single Judge, who by the impugned judgment held that the award passed by the Tribunal does not suffer from any infirmity either in law or on facts. The learned Single Judge also considered the plea for a lenient view as regards the quantum of punishment. However, the learned Single Judge took the view that the punishment was not shockingly disproportionate to the gravity of the W.A. No.1096 of 2010 -: 3 :- misconduct committed by the appellant. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the finding entered by not only the enquiry officer but by the Industrial Tribunal suffers from serious illegality and irregularity. He contents that the entire procedure adopted by the enquiry officer was totally vitiated. The management was apparently vitiated by malafides. Termination of the service of the appellant was nothing but victimization because of political vendetta. We are afraid the above contentions are wholly untenable, which at any rate cannot be allowed to be raised at this stage. 5. As has been noticed already, the enquiry officer found the appellant guilty of all the charges levelled against him. The appellant did not have a case at any stage that the enquiry was vitiated for any reason. 6. The Industrial Tribunal had considered the entire matter elaborately with reference to the evidence adduced by the appellant and the management. The Tribunal came W.A. No.1096 of 2010 -: 4 :- to an independent conclusion that one out of the four charges had been proved against the appellant. Further, the Tribunal also found that the said charge was grave enough warranting dismissal of the appellant. 7. The above finding was considered by the learned Single Judge with reference to the materials available on record. The learned Single Judge did not find any reason to interfere with the above finding entered by the Tribunal. 8. We have carefully perused the entire materials available on record and heard learned counsel for the appellant and respondent No.2 at length. As rightly held by the learned Single Judge that the management had succeeded in proving at least one charge with clinching evidence. It must be remembered that the appellant was holding a responsible post in a financial institution, though small comparatively. He forged loan documents and misappropriated money. Undoubtedly trust and credibility of the public will decide the existence of a financial W.A. No.1096 of 2010 -: 5 :- institution. If stringent action is not taken against an erring employee of such an institution, the public will lose faith in the value system itself. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any reason to take a different view. There is no merit in any of the contentions raised by the appellant. The appeal fails and it is accordingly dismissed. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. Jvt