1. Heard Shri Piyush Asthana, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Vinod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party Nos.2 to 4, Shri Anjani Kumar Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Shri Nadim Murtaza, learned counsel for opposite party No.7 and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for opposite party No.1 through video conferencing
2. This writ petition has been filed for the following main reliefs:-
"I. A writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned enquiry report dated 08.04.2021 (Annexure No.1) submitted by the Enquiry Officer the opposite party No.6 to the Managing Director of the Bank (Opposite Party No.4).
II. A writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the Managing Director to appoint a New Enquiry officer in place of earlier appointed enquiry officer Dr. A.K. Mudgal Regional Manager Agra Division directing him to conduct a fair enquiry strictly in accordance with law and not to proceed further to conclude the departmental proceeding against the petitioner on the basis of impugned enquiry report dated 08.04.2021 (Annexure No.01) submitted by Dr. A.K. Mudgal Regional Manager Agra Division the opposite party No.6.
III. A writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the Chairman/Sachiv of Cooperative Institutional Service Board Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow the opposite party No.7 not to accord its concurrence on the basis of impugned enquiry report dated 08.04.2021 (Annexure No.1)."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 19.01.2021 passed by the Managing Director, U.P. Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Limited, Lucknow. Challenging the suspension order, the petitioner approached this Court in Writ Petition No.4092(S/S) of 2021 (Rajesh Kumar Vs. U.P. Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Ltd. through M.D. Lucknow and others), which was disposed of finally vide order dated 11.02.2021 with the direction to the authorities to conclude the departmental enquiry with expedition and to be more precise on or before 15th May, 2021 subject to the cooperation of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, thereafter, the enquiry officer submitted the enquiry report dated 08.04.2021 to the disciplinary authority upon which the disciplinary authority issued show cause notice dated 16.04.2021 to the petitioner to submit reply and in response thereof the petitioner submitted his reply on 06.05.2021. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that this Court by order dated 11.02.2021, also directed that the petitioner shall be provided opportunity of personal hearing by the disciplinary authority. The Managing Director, issued a letter dated 13.05.2021 to the petitioner, fixing 27.05.2021 at 11:00 am at his office, at Lucknow for providing opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that enquiry report dated 08.04.2021 under challenge suffers from various irregularities and illegalities, with respect to which the petitioner has already raised objection before the disciplinary authority in pursuance of the show cause notice dated 16.04.2021
6. In view of the above facts, this Court is not inclined to consider the objections against the enquiry officer?s report in the present writ petition, leaving it open for the disciplinary authority to consider the objections of the petitioner against the enquiry officer?s report.
7. So far as the petitioner?s prayer for directing the Managing Director not to proceed and not to conclude the departmental proceedings against the petitioner on the basis of the enquiry report dated 08.04.2021, is concerned, the same can not be granted inasmuch as in the earlier writ petition No.4092(S/S) of 2021 filed by the petitioner himself, there is direction to the disciplinary authority to conclude the enquiry within the stipulated period.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to Covid-19 pandemic reasons, the petitioner who is resident of District Kannoj is not able to appear on the date fixed for personal hearing before the disciplinary authority. If some other date is fixed by the disciplinary authority for personal hearing the petitioner will appear on that date before the authorities concerned.
9. Learned counsel for the opposite parties have no objection to the innocuous prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
10. In view of the aforesaid it is provided that the petitioner shall file an application before the Managing Director opposite party No.4 requesting him to fix some other date instead of 27.05.2021 to provide him opportunity of personal hearing. If any such application is filed by tomorrow, the Managing Director-opposite party No.4 shall fix, some other date instead of 27.05.2021 to provide opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Such new date shall be duly communicated to the petitioner giving reasonable time to the petitioner to appear.
11. The petitioner undertakes to appear on the date so fixed by the Managing Director, for personal hearing and that the petitioner shall not seek any adjournment.
12. The Disciplinary Authority shall pass final order expeditiously say within 15 days after the date fixed for providing opportunity of personal hearing.
13. In case of any grievance to the petitioner against final order, it would be open to the petitioner to take all the pleas/objections in appropriate proceedings as raised in this writ petition.
14. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.5.2021 Ashutosh Pandey