IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9207 of 2011 Anil Kumar Ambashtha son of late Nageshwar Prasad R/o A/p Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, Branch More, P.O. Mora, P.S. Bhagwanpur, Hatt, Dist. Siwan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The Chairman-cum-Appellate Authority, Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, Head office-Sharma complex, Kalambag chowk, Muzaffarpur-842001 2. The General Manager (personal) Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, H.O. Sharma Complex, Kalambag chowk Muzaffarpur-842001 3. The Regional Manager, Regional office, Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, Rajbansi Nagar, Siwan. 4. The Branch Manager, Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank Branch Mora P.O. Mora Dist. Siwan. ---Respondents. For the petitioner : Mr. Rajeeva Roy,Advocate. For the Bank : Mr. Prabhakar Jha, Advocate. ----------- 02 21.06.2011 Heard both sides. Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 05.03.2009 (Annexure 2) passed by respondent disciplinary authority as well as the order dated 06.05.2010 (Annexure-6) passed by the respondent appellate authority in a departmental proceeding. By a communication dated 08.10.2002, petitioner was served with a memo of charge(s). He was called upon to defend those charge(s). Accordingly, petitioner participated in the proceeding. Upon conclusion of the proceeding enquiry report dated 04.03.2006 was submitted wherein 03 charges of the main charge sheet/memo and 01 charge of the supplementary charge sheet/memo was/were found proved. The petitioner was supplied copy of the enquiry report seeking his explanation/reply. On 27.03.2007, the writ petitioner submitted his reply. The authorities thereafter provided him with a communication containing proposed punishment to be inflicted upon him and sought his response/reply to 2 which the petitioner responded and was afforded personal hearing. The disciplinary authority by order dated 05.03.2009 (Annexure-2) imposed the following punishments:- (i) Reduction of pay to next lower stage up to a period of 02 years. (ii) Fine of Rs. 1,01,000/- ( One lac one thousand) The appeal of the petitioner was also dismissed hence the writ petition. Mr. Roy learned counsel for the petitioner made diverse submissions in support of the application. It is submitted that adequate opportunity was not granted to the petitioner. It is further submitted that the period of 02 years of reduction of pay to the next lower stage already lapsed yet the petitioner has not been restored to his original status/scale of pay. Mr. Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Bank, on the other hand, submits that the facts enumerated in the application and taken note of by this Court hereinabove would amply demonstrate that the petitioner was afforded reasonable opportunity to defend the case. It is submitted that no procedural infirmity in the decision making process has been demonstrated by the petitioner and as such the orders passed by the disciplinary authority do not merit any interference. It is further submitted that the grievance of the petitioner that he has not been restored to his original status/scale of pay upon expiry of 02 years of punishment can be looked into by the authorities if appropriate representation in this regard is filed. 3 Having heard the parties, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has not been able to demonstrate any legal infirmity in the procedure adopted by the authorities in concluding the departmental proceeding. If the grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been restored to his original status/scale of pay upon expiry of 02 years is correct then the authorities are directed to restore him to his original status/scale of pay within a period of 04 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Petitioner shall be entitled to scale of pay w.e.f. the date on which the period of 02 years, as directed under Annexure-2, expires. The arrears, on that account, if any, shall also be made available to the petitioner. The application is dismissed with the aforesaid observation/direction. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )