IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 30TH OCTOBER 2009 / 8TH KARTHIKA 1931 OP.No. 32466 of 2002(M) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- T.C.SUGEETHA, W/O. D.VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 51 YEARS, CLERK/CASHIER, UNION BANK OF INDIA,NAGAMPADAM BRANCH, REP. THROUGH HER POWER OF ATTORNEY D.VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O. LATE M.K.DAMODARAN NAIR, ASST. GENERAL MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY MR. M.R.RAJENDRAN NAIR, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADVS. MR.M.R.SUDHEENDRAN, MR.NIDHI BALACHANDRAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. UNION BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER (PERSONNEL), CENTRAL OFFICE, UNION BANK BHAVAN, VIDHAN BHAVAN MARG, MUMBAI-400 021 2. THE ASST. GENERAL MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY MR. A.S.P.KURUP, SC, UBI. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P. NO. 32466/2002-M: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE STAFF CIRCULAR DTD. 20/10/2000 ISSUED BY THE R.1. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LEAVE APPLICATION DTD. 11/11/2000 SUBMITTED TO THE R.1. BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE STAFF CIRCULAR NO.1313 CONTAINING THE LEAVE RULES. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 26/01/2002 SUBMITTED TO THE R.1. BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM DTD. 29/01/2002 ISSUED BY THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 23/02/2002 ADDRESSED TO THE R.2. BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM DTD. 08/03/2002 BY THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 21/06/2002 SUBMITTED TO THE R.2. BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET DTD. 10/06/2002 ISSUED BY THE DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DTD. 23/08/2002 SUBMITTED TO THE DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 28/08/2002 SUBMITTED TO THE R.2. BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE INQUIRY REPORT DTD. 02/07/2003 ISSUED BY THE INQUIRY OFFICER/DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY (SENIOR MANAGER, PERSONNEL, NRO, ERNAKULAM) OF UNION BANK OF INDIA. EXT.P.13: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. NRO:E:PER:855:03 DTD. 09/08/2003 ISSUED BY THE INQUIRY OFFICER/DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY (SENIOR MANAGER, PERSONNEL, NRO, ERNAKULAM) OF UNION BANK OF INDIA. EXT.P.14: COPY OF THE APPEAL DTD. NIL. SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY OF UNION BANK OF INDIA. EXT.P.15: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.CO:IRD:1300 DTD.06/03/2004 ISSUED BY THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY/GENERAL MANAGER (HRO). O.P. NO. 32466/2002-M: RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R1: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD. 21/04/2000 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO RESPONDENTS. EXT.R2: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO.ROT:PER:II:226 DTD. 04/05/2000 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT. EXT.R3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 19/05/2000 GIVEN BY PETITIONER TO RESPONDENTS. EXT.R4: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 25/05/2000 GIVEN TO THE PETITIONER BY RESPONDENT. EXT.R5: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 13/11/2001 GIVEN TO THE PETITIONER BY RESPONDENT. EXT.R6: COPY OF THE VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT SCHEME 2000-2001 CIRCULATED VIDE STAFF CIRCULAR NO.4669 DTD. 07/11/2000 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS. EXT.R7: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM DTD. 28/10/2002 NO.NRO:E:PER:2775:02 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ........................................... O.P.NO.32466 OF 2002-M ............................................. Dated this the 30th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was a Clerk cum Cashier working under the 1st respondent Bank. While she was posted at Nagambadam branch of the Bank, in order to assist her childeren who have gone abroad for studies, she availed of privilege leave for the period 12.6.2000 to 8.12.2000 and went abroad during this period. 2. While she was contining on leave, the Bank introduced Ext.P1, a scheme for granting special leave for staff members. Accordng to the petitioner, being an employee, who had rendered more than 10 years of service and as she was entitled to take leave under Ext.P1 for assisting her children, who have settled aborad, she submitted Ext.P2 application for leave for 5 years. It is stated that there was no respose to Ext.P2. 3. Despite the expiry of the privilege leave initially granted, the petitioner remained abroad. While so, by Ext.P5 order dated 29.1.2002, the Bank declined the leave : 2 : O.P.NO.32466 OF 2002-M applied for by the petitioner and she was directed to report for duty. The petitioenr replied by Ext.P6 where she reiterated her request for granting leave applied by Ext.P2. Again by Ext.P7, the Bank required the petitioner to report for duty, which was not complied with by the petitioner. 4. Since the petitioner was thus remaining on unauthorised absence Ext.P9 memo of charges was issued to the petitioner alleging the following misconducts: Gross misconducts: 1. Doing act prejudicial to the interest of the Bank. 2. Remaining unauthorisedly absent continuously for a period exceeding 30 days. 3. Willful disobedience of lawful and reasonable order of the Management. Minor Misconducts: 1. Absence without leave. 2. Breach of rules of the Bank in the matter of availing leave. 5. She submitted Ext.P10 explanation and an enquiry officer was appointed and notice on enquiry was issued. The petitioner did not participate in the enquiry. Considering the evidence adduced by the Bank, the enquiry : 3 : O.P.NO.32466 OF 2002-M officer submitted Ext.P12 report finding the petitioner guilty of the misconducts alleged. The report was acepted by the disciplinary authority and by Ext.P13 she was dismissed from service. She filed Ext.P14, that was also rejected by Ext.P15. It is challenging Exts.P13 and P15 and to direct the respondents to consider Ext.P11 application made by the petitioner for volunary retirement, the writ petition is filed. 6. On facts, it is very clear that from 8.12.2000 onwards the petitioner was on unauthorised absence. By Exts.P5 and P7 issued on 29.1.2002 and 8.3.2002 twice she was given an opportunity to report for duty, which also was not availed of by the petitoner. It was in such circumstases that she was charge sheeted. An Enquiry was held with an opportunity to the petitioner, which also was not availed. The enquiry officer considered the evidence adduced by the Bank and submitted Ext.P12 enqiury report holding that the petitioner is guilty of the misconducts. This was accepted by the disciplinary authority. A reading of the enqiry report shows that the findings therein are consistant with the evidence availble and no vitiating circumstacnces have been : 4 : O.P.NO.32466 OF 2002-M pointed out to invalidate the report. It was in such circumstances that the disciplinary authorty imposed the punishment. I do not find anything illegal or perverse in the view taken either by the enquiry officer or the disciplinary authory or the apellate authority. Consequently there is no merit in the application submitted by the petitioner for voluntary retirement. The writ petition fails and it is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE cl : 5 : O.P.NO.32466 OF 2002-M ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ........................................... O.P.NO.32466 OF 2002-M ............................................. 30th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T