Bank Of Maharashtra Thr Its Chief Manager v. Milind Yashwant Kamble

47-wp1036-2024.doc VRJ

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1036 OF 2024 VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Date: 2024.04.18 18:30:20 +0530 Bank of Maharashtra, Through Its Chief Manager Mr. Umesh B. Shinde ... Petitioner V/s.

Milind Yashwant Kamble ... Respondent Mr. A. R. Gole for the petitioner.

Ms. Shraddha Pawar i/by Mr. Nilesh Patil for the respondent.

CORAM

: AMIT BORKAR, J.

DATED : APRIL 18, 2024 P.C.:

1.

Arguable questions are raised. Hence, Rule.

2.

On perusal of the impugned judgment, it appears that the charges levelled against the petitioner-bank were held to be proved. However, the Industrial Court directed the petitioner-bank to pay 50% of backwages by recording a finding that the punishment imposed by the petitioner-bank appears to be illegal and unjustified.

3.

The charges levelled against the petitioner-bank is that the petitioner-bank in collusion with one Mr. Karande caused loss of Rs.54 Lakhs. Substance of charges levelled against the petitioner-

47-wp1036-2024.doc bank is to the effect that despite transferring amounts from the account of Mr. Karande in favour of third parties, corresponding debit entries were not made in Mr. Karande's account. 4.

In my opinion, the acts which are held to be proved against the petitioner-bank prima facie justifies punishment imposed against the petitioner-bank. Hence, there shall be interim relief in terms of prayer clause (b).

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)