1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4618 OF 2009 (Jagannath Biharilal Shukla vs. Regional Manager, Central Bank of India) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. JANUARY 14, 2010. Heard Shri Marpakwar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Lahiri, learned counsel for the respondent. The contention of Shri Marpakwar, learned counsel is, inference that signature of Mr. Nagnathan on Exh. 4 is forged by the petitioner has been reached only on the basis of report of Hand Writing expert and that expert in cross examination has accepted that the report was not final but was subject to verification of signatures from original documents. He further points out that Mr. Nagnathan in cross examination accepted that he has never seen original of Exh. 4 and, therefore, his original signatures. Shri Lahiri, learned counsel has pointed out that the petitioner had earlier made a mercy petition to Bank and in it accepted that he made signature of Mr. Nagnathan. He further argues that Mr. Nagnathan also after perusal of document at Exh. 4 (xerox copy) before CGIT stated that the signature was not his and it was 2 forgery. I have perused the relevant papers. I find that the Enquiry was held to be vitiated by CGIT but then the admission of petitioner about forging of signature of Mr. Nagnathan was put to him and he explained it by saying that it was under compulsion. However, no such defence was raised at the earliest possible opportunity and in any case before CGIT while filing statement of claim. The learned CGIT has after considering this material and other evidence on record, upheld the charge and consequent dismissal. I do not find any jurisdictional error or perversity. Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.