High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of rhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue.a writ of lvlandamus or any other appropriate order or direition in the nature of a writ directing the respondents to pay the increments that were stopped under the order of punishment dated 31-07-1g99 which was set aside by order dated 19-12-2013 in w.P.No. 4965 of 2001 as affirmed by the order dated 09-06-2014 in w.A.No. 7o4 ol 2014 after declaring non-payment of increments as aforesaid as arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14,21 and 3ooA of constitution of lndia, principles of natural justice and equity in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to fix an early date for hearing of W.P.No.23292116 in the interest of justice. ' l.A. No: 1 oF 2o 10] 4{PMP. NO: 2869 4 0F 2016) Petition unJt r Section 151 CPC praying that in the <;ircurnslances stated in the affidavit filod n support of the petition, the High Couft may be pleased to. direct the resportrle nts to pay the increments that were stopped under the order of punishment dale I 31-07-1999 which was set aside by orde'd;rted 19-12-2013 in W.P.No. 496t, o' ;1001 as affirmed by the order dated 09-C6-,10'14 in W.A.No. 704 o1 2O14 pendin I disposal of the above writ petition in ther intr:rest of justice. - Counsel for the F'etitioner: SRl. PRATUSHA BOPPANA Counsel for the Fle ;pondent No.1: M SHALINI Counsel for the Fle ;pondent No. 2 and 3: K NANDINI ALIAS ,A NANDINIREDDY The Court made th,) following: ORDER HON'BLT SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA ITIRIT PETITION No. 23292 OF 2016 ORDER: Petitioner seeks a direction to respondents to pay increments which were stopped under the order of punishment dated 31.07. 1999 which was se[ aside by the order dated

19.12.2013 in Writ Petition No. 4965 of 2OO1, as affirmed by the order dated 09-06.2014 in Writ Appeal No. 704 of 2014.

2. Petitioner worked as Manager of UCO Bank in Patighanpur Branch, Medak District from 22.O5.1ga7 il

21.O2.1990. While u,orking as such, he was imposed punishment uide order dated 3 1 .07. 1999 for the irregularities found in the branch. Challenging the said order, he filed Writ Petition No. 4965 of 2001, wherein this Court by order dated

19.12.2013, observed that principles of natural justice have not been followed and some wilnesses. who were proposed to be examined by petitioner, were not examined and certain documents were not permitted to be exhibited, accordingly, set aside the penalties imposed against petitioner for various charges. It was however, made clear that respondent bank is at liberty to proceed with enquiry in accordance with Rules ald Regulations by affording an opportunity to petitioner to examine the witnesscs proposed by him and by permitting him \ 2 however, Single JurdlY' to exhibit t I.l preferred \ rlt ocuments which he seeks to exhibit lhr: bank l.ppea1 No. 7O4 of 2014 against thc sirid rlrder' r ivision Bench dismisscd the Appt'a I rv the wherein th e judgmen t datt : 09.06.2O 14, upholding the order- nf tl e learned l. is stated, petitioner submitted rcpre:ierrt:ltrons )14, 06.08.2014, 17.Og'2014 ftrr pavnrent of dated 08 ( r:- differential zlr )Llnt on account of stoppage of itlcrt ntents, but rr.,'r rut considering the same, the baL-rl< ll'ficials r'l ronduct fresh enquiry keepingl ir 1o-ce the proceeded punishmer.t ( i stoppage of eight increments since J C7 1999' The banl< latt - gave reply dated O3'O9 2OI4 not agr'rt rJr I to pay the bene'fits. '(rtitioner complaining wilful disobedi'rrrce on the part of respo Lrients in implementing the order rn \fu'r it Petition' Irled Cc,trtctn , Case No. 164 1 of 2OI4' This Corrrt t:l< sed the said. case crr .| 1.03.2016 observing tha| learnt:d Slitrgl,: .Iudge has not spect 'l:a1ly directed that incremcnts sht'ulcl Lt: I estored' rr:spondents As per tLe :rder of the learned Single Judgc' initiated []e;' enquiry and cooperir'ir; ' lh the trnquiry as petitioner has; Officer, enquirY c l rld not be n, )t been completed rrt :r PProPriate time' ' 1re grievance of petitioner is that l1[)or settlng aside the prt t.shment order, he is entitled to bc pe irl t.re entire incremenls r tl-rheld by the respondents and there is zrilsolutely ). l J no justification whatsoever for them to continue to withhold the

3. The Zonal Manager of the bank Illed counter stating that pursuant to this Court's order dated 19.12.2013, they had taken a decision to proceed with the enquiry and appointed trnquiry Officer and Presenting Ofhcer, however, petitioner, without cooperating with the trnquiry Ofhcer, approached this Court by way of this Writ Pctition. It is stated that petitioner while functioning as Manager a[ Sangareddy Branch, allegedly committed acts of omission and commission lor which he was served another charge sheet dated 13.03.2006. On completion of enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted report and the Disciplinary Authority agreed with the said frndings, passed final order dated 16.O 1.2OO7, dismissing him from service. On Appeal, Appellate Authority through order dated 28.01.2OO8 upheld the penalty awarded by the Disciplinary Authority. He therefore, hled Review Petition on 23.O3.2008 to consider his case on sympathetic and humanitarian grounds. The Reviewing Authority, exercising thc powers conferred under Regulation 18 of UCO Bank Officers trmployees (Discipline & Appeal) Regulations, 1976, modified the penalty of dismissal to compulsory retirement from bank service. Petitioner challenged 4 the said rrrd e r 2011 ancl t'Le : 1r lhe trnquirl' (l rePort and 1is and basod ( )rl tor,l,ards re c r-: l.,Lted 16.04.201O by filing Writ Petitiorr rlo 782 of .l ne is pending considera tion ' :. finally stated that in the fresh enquitr in itiated' ',icer after completing the enquiry u'ou r'i submit :r:linary authority would pass approp'-irrle orders re said orders, petitioner would br-'pairJ arnounts ,-rd increments and consequenl ial c ill:re ntial amounts ari Pr : bank norms. F{ rrd Sri B. Nalin Kumar, learncd Scllic r (bunsel Boppana, learnerl .l( )uI tsel for 4 on behail c l- \{s. PrathYusha r -r( Ms. M. Shalini, petltlonora learned Stancling 'j'ru rsel for respondent

5. punishmt'rt1 2OO 1, g,rzrr tl rr enqulry uI -[ -,i tik r rs Court, while setting asidc tttr: o -der of I ,Lred 3 1 .07. 1 999, rn Writ Petitic'r'r lJt l9tr5 oi liberty to bank authorities to procccrl r u'lth the r r,:ordance with the Rules and RegutatLons by )::,portunity to petitioner to examine tlre u itnesses affordin g r.rL proposerl lrt him and by permitting him to exh bit the clocum(r!'rl r ri ich he seeks to exhibit Learned Sing c 'Jl'dge has not spe cific:r .'directed that increments shoulC br: r--stcred As per the orlt: :,1 the learned Single Judge, respondr'nts initiated fre sh euq,r r rtnd. as petitioner has not been r:oorie:ating u'ith Olhcer, enquiry could not bc c' rt rtp e ted at t[e_Er-rcluirr ) appropriate time. In view o[ the same, pctiLioncl cannot c:laim that increments should be released. Since respondcnt bank in the counter stated that after completion o_f enqurirry, based on lhe repor[ of the trnquiry Officer, disciplinarv authoriry $.,ould pay amounts towards reduced increments a nC conseqtrcntial differential amounts as per bank norms, this Court is of the view that petitioner is not entitled to any relief ;-ish I nou,.

6. The Writ Petition is [hercfore, disirosr.d <;[ ciirccting the respondents to cnsure that cnc1uiry. irirtiatecl :rqainsl petitioner is completed within a period o[ four mrtnths frorir the date of reccipt of a copy of this ordcr. No cosLs. 7 . Consequenli-y,, miscellaneous Appli.. atioirs, if an_y shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. A.JAYASREE ASSISTANT REG]STRAR To, SECTION OFFICER

1. The Chairman and Managing Director UCO Bank, havang their Registered Office at 10, B.T.M Sarani, Kolkata-7o0 001.

2. The General Manager, Personnel Services Dept., Head Office-ll UCO Bank, 3and4 DD Block, Sector-|, Salt Lake City, Kolkaata-70O 064.

3. The Regional l\ilanager, UCO Bank Regional, Office, Road No. 10, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

4. One CC to SRl. PRATUSHA BOPPANA Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to SRl. M SHALINI, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to SRl. K NANDINI ALIAS A NANDINIREDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CD Copies 8 O1e spare copy GK IW. KV HIGH COUFI-I' DATED:21 10t.12025 ORDER WP.No.2329't" ot 2016 a. hE S74 /c \) l:) ,a) ? :l flAI ZUZ5 6'r C \*\. ,-), \*: I rtf ,1. f ah EO * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT 13 )STS ,Pltc. p\sli