Baldev Raj Mahi,
S/o Sh. Ram Asra, Nawanshahar (Pb)
Ex-Manager, Dated: 30-09
Baba Deep Singh Nagar,
Saloh Road,
Backside K.C.Palace, Nawanshahr
Distt. Sahid Bhagat Singh Nagar 1. Through proper channel of Deputy General Manager (DA),
Circle Office, Hoshiapur
The General Manager, 2. Direct copy to Appellate Authority
(Appellate Authority),
Personnel Administration Divn.,
Punjab National Bank,
Head Office, 7, Bhikaiji Cama Place,
New Delhi
R/Sir
Reg: Supplementary submissions in the matter of my appeal dated 12.09.2011 under Regulation 17 of D & A Regulations, 1977 in the matter of Charge Sheet dated 05-10 served upon me under Regulation 6 of D & A Regulations, 1977 by the Deputy General Manager (Disciplinary Authority), Punjab National Bank, Circle Office, Hoshiarpur, against the impugned orders of punishment vide No. COH/HRD/I/BRM/2298 dated 06-07, served upon me by the Assistant General Manager, (Disciplinary Authority), Circle Office, Hoshiarpur thereby inflicting the major penalty under Regulation 4 (h) of D & A Regulations, 1977.
Respectfully, it is submitted to consider as under:-
Charge 3 (1-a) In continuation of appeal date 12.09.2011
In addition Both CC accounts limit have been given to commission agents as basis of dami (commission base). CC book debt limits were sanctioned to both the parties. Both the accounts were reported in limits sanctioned statement in PNB207 for the relative month, the Usman Pur branch wrote a letter dated 03.12.2007 to DGM, Zonal Audit Office Jalandhar that is annex 1and 2 of item no. 1 and 2 that these account were stands close during the inspection period on 05.11.2007. copy of this letter was also sent to SRM office Jalandhar for information and necessary action. On the basis of this letter inspection office has closed our IR file and drops the objection.
The Regional office never pointed out that the limits have been sanctioned in excess of vested powers. How ever when it came to our notice both the accounts got adjusted and closed and IR file closed. NO discrepancy was pointed out in quarterly report of senior officer visit report by SRM office Jalandhar.
Charge 3 (2-e)
I wish to submit that in this case collateral security had been obtained from the borrowers. I have obtained information through RTI act copy of Board note enclosed which was prepared by Present manager Sh. Pritpal Singh and Deputy Manager Sh. Harmesh Bali. This board note shows that collateral security of residence in the name of Sh Tara Singh for 10.5 marlas value of IP 9.50 lakh has been obtained and is held on the record of the loan file.
Charge 3 (3-c)
Copy of Board note enclosed which was prepared by Present manager Sh. Pritpal Singh and Deputy Manager Sh. Harmesh Bali. These Board notes clearly indicate that all three account are satisfactory and are regular accounts. Copy of Board note is enclosed. Charge 3 (3-d)
Copy of Board note is enclosed which clearly indicate that collateral security had been obtained in all CC accounts. For reviewing the all CC limits, the present manager and deputy manager prepared board note for reviewing the all CC accounts and approved these CC limit on existing terms and condition.
Charge 4 In addition I was not posted at usmanpur on 17.05.2005 and was working at Branch office Rahon on 17.05.2005. That this loan was sanctioned on 25.08.2007 and was reported in limit sanction statement for the month Aug to SRM office Jalandhar. I have obtained this information and document obtained under RTI act 2005 which was enclosed copy of loan document register and copy of limit sanctioned statements.
this loan was sanctioned on 25.08.2007. How this loan application can be exhibited in the enquiry? How this charge can be proved against me.
This charge relates to previous manager Sh. Gurbhajan Ram who was working as manager in Usmanpur/Behloor kalan on 17.05.2005. I have obtained loan application PNB762, PNB763 date 11.03.2005 and PNB763 date 17.05.2005 and request letter of Sh. Balbir Singh of date 17.05.2005 for reducing the limit from 4 lakh to 2 lakh under RTI act 2005. Copy of above documents are enclosed. All these documents were not produced in the enquiry intentionally to prove this wrong charge against me and copy of these documents were not supplied to me.
Charge 5 Housing loan account NC12 Smt. Gurdev Kaur
These defence documents were held in loan file of Smt. Gurdev kaur and Janak Raj which was Ex. D20a to Ex. D20c were written by the borrowers under their on hand in regional language which were under their signature. Total amount of loan was withdrawn from SF account on July26 copy of SF statement is enclosed for kind perusal.
No authority has tried reading and understanding my submission made in the inquiry and in my replies and tried to make me a scape Goat.
That in my basic appeal dated 12.09. I have sufficiently pleaded that the decision of the Disciplinary Authority has not been his own decision and also it was not free from interference and influence as well as pressure and as an advise and also a direction of the CVO, Vigilance Department, Head Office, New Delhi. “However, I had also requested the CPIO, Head Office New Delhi separately vide my application dated 18.07.2011 under Right to Information Act to provide the entire correspondence held in between the Disciplinary Authority and the CVO. The CVO has provided me the photocopies of the entire correspondence vide his letter dated 10.09.2011 and after perusal of this correspondence a new fact has come on surface that the decision of the Disciplinary Authority has only not been dependent but also a direction of the CVO, thereby further revealing that the Disciplinary Authority has also been misdirected from the office of CVO, Head Office, New Delhi and in the light of the same I submit as under:-
A. That the Disciplinary Authority vide his letter dated 29.01.2011 has proposed the punishment to the CVO to read as under:-
“ Reduction to five lower stage in the time scale of pay for a period of 5 years with further direction that he will not earn increments during the period of such reduction and on expiry of such period the reduction will have the effect of postponing the future increments of his pay in terms of clause 4 (f) of P.N.B Officers Employee (D & A Regulations, 1977).
B. That thereafter a note no. VIG: V-4520 Dated 05.03.2011 was put up in the office of CVO wherein the CVO has recorded his observations to read as under:-
“ Some of the charges i.e. 1 (A), II-a (1), d-I, II (b), I & II etc. which have been held proved have extreme malafide and moral turpitude issues. Normally, it would be difficult to agree for such officers to continue in the services of the bank when doubtful integrity and / or moral turpitude issues are involved. D.A may reconsider his views.”
On the basis of above observations the Chief Manager Vigilance Department, Head Office, New Delhi vide his letter VIG/ HSPR/4520 Dated 10.03.2011 conveyed the aforesaid advise of the CVO to the circle head to read as under:-
“ Some of the charges have been held proved and have extreme malafide and moral turpitude issues. Normally, it would be difficult to agree for such officers to continue in the services of the bank when doubtful integrity and / or moral turpitude issues are involved.”
“The opinion of handwriting expert was also obtained who conveyed vervally that apparently the signatures put on the certificates do not tally with the signatures of Shri Mahi available on bank record”.
C. That thereafter again circle head (Disciplinary Authority), Chandigarh Road, Hoshiarpur vide his letter no. C.O/HRD-1:DISC.:991 Dated 24.03.2011 wrote to the Chief Manager, Vigilance Department, Head Office, New Delhi to inflict the following punishment:-
“ Reduction to 7 lower stage in the time scale of pay for a period of 7 years with further directions that he will not earn increments during the period of such reduction and on expiry of such period the reduction will have the effect of postponing the future increments of his pay in terms of clause 4 (f) of P.N.B Officers Employee (D & A Regulations, 1977).
D. That thereafter, an office note in the office of CVO, Vigilance Department, Head Office, New Delhi vide no. VIG: V-4520 Dated 13.04.2011 was put up wherein the CVO has recorded his observations to read as under:-
“ I find that the actions of the officer involves issues of moral turpitude / doubt about his integrity (In OD against FD of Zero Balance, Issuance of fake education loan / certificate for Australian Visa etc.). Hence, continuation of his services in the bank is not desirable. Please advise D.A he may be put down in scale-I at beginning of the scale only.”
But, while conveying the advise of CVO to the Disciplinary Authority, the revised proposed punishment of revertion in scale-I was not conveyed and concealed in various communications between CVO and the Disciplinary Authority.
For the purpose of brevity the photocopy of the office note No. VIG-V:4520 Dated 13.04.2011 received through CPIO, Head Office, New Delhi is enclosed as Annexure-A thereby proving that finally the CVO had agreed upon to revert me from MMG Scale-II to JMG Scale-I whereas this advise was not conveyed to the Disciplinary Authority. Had this proposed punishment been conveyed to the Disciplinary Authority, the D.A would have implemented the same instead of inflicting the harsh punishment of my compulsory retirement.
Thus, the fact remains that whatever the advice of the CVO was ever conveyed to the D.A the same has been to the extent that I should have not continued in the bank services and thus, the harsh punishment of my compulsory retirement was finally inflicted upon.
The Appellate Authority is therefore, requested to examine Annexure-A and to quash and set aside the punishment of compulsory retirement which is also based on a different fact that bank has suffered a loss whereas there has been no loss to the bank.
Yours faithfully
(B.R. Mahi)
DATE 16 MAY
0 comments