Site news

THE CGM KARNATAKA BANK DISMISSED CHANDAN P OFFICER FROM JOB WITHOUT “ANY COMPLAINT MISCONDUCT CAUSING ANY LOSS TO BANK”

 
 
Picture of System Administrator
THE CGM KARNATAKA BANK DISMISSED CHANDAN P OFFICER FROM JOB WITHOUT “ANY COMPLAINT MISCONDUCT CAUSING ANY LOSS TO BANK”
by System Administrator - Sunday, 3 December 2017, 3:02 PM
 

By: M.S.Yatnatti: Editor and Video Journalist Bengaluru: Reportedly chandan the officer has not committed any misconduct as alleged.The chief General Manger has dismissed chandan without any proof and evidence of committing any misconduct or any irregularity as he has not taken any loan proceeds from bank and loan proceeds were taken and serviced by borrower and loan was repaid and closed by borrower. The charge sheet is vague and frivolous and without any proof and evidence as it states without any documentary evidence and without any witnesses and basis that he have taken the loan and utilized the proceeds whereas he has not taken the proceeds of loan as per record of the bank and Charges are imaginary and without any proof and they are not proved . No proof is given that he has taken the loan directly from the bank. The credit facility is released as TLAA/ c No 220 dated 07-11-2015 in the name of brrower and it was taken by borrower and serviced by borrower question of he committing any misconduct does not arise as charge sheetfalsely states that he have availed loan proceeds which is incorrect and false and charges cannot be farmed on him without any documentary evidence

According to reliable sources the dismissed officer has re-submitted the grounds to challenge the dismissal order dated 20-09-2017 as these points were necessary for justice and equity which were not considered during appeal-enquiry despite it was submitted then and now he requested to review the appeal and consider afresh in detail as dismissal order dated 20-09-2017 was unwarranted and illegal and harsh amounts to coercing persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats" .Reportedly he was coerced into giving evidence against himself by force fully accepting and admitting to a false charge sheet though facts were different in the loan file and entrapping him in an unwarranted charge sheet by forcing him to sign on typed papers on 17-08-2017 when fact of the case were known to them and were different and this was done to damage his career in the bank as some vested interests of crab mentality were at work. When facts are different his admitting or not admitting the charges does not affect the fact of the case and appellate authority have to proceed on facts of the case and not on fiction or a statement extracted by force and coercing on the promise of closer of case as which he never committed any irregularity.

In citation in Ameteeep Machine Tools v labour court Haryana AIR 1980 SC 2135 1980 Lab IC 1297 1981 LLR 10 (1980) 57 FJR 63 it was held that on the receipts of the explanation from employee in response to the charge sheet two contingencies may arise .The first is that in his explanation the employee may admit the charge and plead for leniency with the assurance that he will not repeat it .If however the employee pleads for leniency with the assurance that he will not repeat it and also assures the employer of good behavior then in such circumstance the management should not insist on initiating disciplinary proceedings against him thereafter because otherwise when an industrial dispute is raised and employer may be guilty of bad faith.

The charge sheet is vague and frivolous and without any proof and evidence as it states without any documentary evidence and without any witnesses and basis that he have taken the loan and utilized the proceeds whereas he has not taken the proceeds of loan as per record of the bank and Charges are imaginary and without any proof and they are not proved . No proof is given that he has taken the loan directly from the bank. The credit facility is released as TLAA/ c No 220 dated 07-11-2015 in the name of brrower and it was taken by borrower and serviced by borrower question of he committing any misconduct does not arise as charge sheetfalsely states that he have availed loan proceeds which is incorrect and false and charges cannot be farmed on him without any documentary evidence .After taking the loan what borrower does is not the bank officers job and it should not matter to the bank and bank officer personal dealing cannot be subject matter of Bank. .it only take necessary steps that borrower repays the loan and in this case borrower has repaid the loan and after repaying loan bank files false charge sheet on him to just to implicate him falsely and frame him without authority of law and remove him from the post of officer without authority of law as failure of enquiry officer to examine the witnesses and marking of documents will vitiate the enquiry. According to the citation in G V Ashvatyanarayana v central bank of india by chairman Bombay 2003 ILR 937 (Karn HC) if a charge sheet being root of the disciplinary action,when vague will vitiate whole proceedings hence the penalty imposed on delinquent will be quashed. Imposition of penalty by the disciplinary authority will be set aside when the charge sheet is vague, the documents as relied upon were not supplied, and the delinquent was not given time to cross examine the witness the witness ,list of witnesses was not furnished as stipulated by the prescribed conduct regulations.