Ratnesh Kumar v. Panjab And Sind Bank And ORS.
8.
8.
(DL) (DL) 26.11.2025 26.11.2025 Ct. No. 02 (ARPAN) W.P.A. 25537 OF 2025 RATNESH KUMAR VS.
PUNJAB & SIND BANK & OTHERS Mr. Manab Ranjan Sarbadhikari, Adv.
...for the Petitioner Mr. Ranjit Singh, Adv.
Mr. Amar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Pranit Biswas, Adv.
Ms. S. Mukherjee, Adv.
Ms. Aditi Gupta, Adv.
...for the Respondent Bank 1.
Matter is heard in presence of the learned advocates representing the petitioner and Punjab and Sind Bank.
2.
In the writ petition steps taken by the Enquiry Officer vis-à-vis disciplinary authority in initiating disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner are questioned.
3.
During course of hearing, learned advocate representing the Bank authority has produced a copy of the final order dated 18th November, 2025 issued by the Chief General Manager (HRD) (Disciplinary Authority) wherein punishment was imposed to the extent of reducing scale of pay of the petitioner to a lower stage by one stage in the time scale of pay for a period of two years. Copy of the order dated 18th November, 2025 is taken on record. 4.
This order of punishment dated 18th November, 2025 is not under challenge in this writ petition as
petitioner did not have opportunity to question this order at the time of filing this writ petition on 10th November, 2025. Since there is no formal challenge to this order of punishment dated 18th November, 2025, same ought not to be delved into while deciding this writ petition.
5.
However, it appears from the submissions made on behalf of the Bank authority that order of punishment dated 18th November, 2025 is an appealable order.
6.
Leave is granted to the petitioner to prefer appeal questioning the order dated 18th November, 2025 before the Appellate Authority.
7.
All the points which are agitated by filing this writ petition are kept open.
8.
Writ petition stands disposed of.
9.
Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual undertakings.
(SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.)