Kolkata: Observing that no uniform formula can be applied to the payment of back wages, as each case must be decided based on its unique facts, Calcutta High Court set aside the dismissal from service order against a now retired employee of a cooperative bank while directing that he is entitled to 50 per cent of his back wages from the date of dismissal until retirement date.
The bench of Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee was moved by the petitioner, challenging the disciplinary proceedings and the dismissal order against him.
He was accused of gross negligence and misconduct. He allegedly altered the specimen signature of an account holder and replaced it with a left thumb impression (LTI) without any authorisation from the bank manager. He failed to sign the specimen signature card to acknowledge the change but instead only recorded it in the bank’s computer system. On June 27, 2009, Rs. 3,90,000 was withdrawn using a withdrawal slip based on the LTI which was denied by the account holder. This caused the bank a loss of the said amount.
The petitioner, an assistant-grade-III (Deposit), asserted that his duties didn’t involve withdrawing funds from bank accounts. He claimed he left his desk without logging off, and someone in his absence scanned the LTI from the depositor’s specimen signature card. He denied the allegations, contending that no handwriting expert’s opinion or CCTV footage was used to back the allegations against him.
The maintainability of his writ petition was challenged. The court observed that when a duty arises from statutory rules concerning the terms of employment of its staff and officers, a breach of such duty becomes amenable to writ jurisdiction.
The court observed that management failed to present any evidence linking the petitioner to the alteration in signature to LTI or the withdrawal of the amount. The charge sheet was issued by the CEO without explicit authorisation from the Board of Directors, which is the disciplinary authority.
Court also directed the disbursement of the petitioner’s retiral benefits, treating him as being in service with continuity of service from the date of his suspension.