Employment of Labour (Standing Orders) Act (VIII of 1965) Section 19
Departmental proceeding was initiated against
the employee but the same was subsequently dropped
and a simple order of termination containing no
charge er stigma was issued The order was valid.
22 DLR (SC) 284 & 23 DLR (SC) 85 relied...(11)
Section 1
Sonali Bank is a creature of Statute namely, PO 26 of 1972, which has made it a jurstic person. It has its own identity, it functions as per the said statute, so it cannot be said to be an office under the
Judgment
This Rule, under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the judgment and decree dated 16-3-91, passed by the Second Sub-Judge Khulna, in Title Appeal No. 35 of 1988, reversing those of the Assistant Judge, Khulna passed on 18-12-87, in Title Suit No. 160 of 1984.
2Short facts for the disposal of this Rule are, that the plaintiff-opposite party filed a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction against defendant-petitioners, praying for a declaration that the order of termination vide letter dated 24-8-83 is void, illegal, ultra vires and without jurisdiction and also prayed for a direction upon the defendants to re-instate him in service with effect from 24-8-83. stating, inter alia, that the plaintiff was appointed on 1-9-76 as a Godown Keeper of the Sonali Bank, that departmental proceedings were drawn against him for alleged shortage of 800 maunds of raw jute from the godown of M/s Rainbow Traders Ltd. where he was posted. The plaintiff-opposite party denied the charges levelled against him. However, after due enquiry proceedings against him were dropped but an order of termination was issued, terminating him from service.
3. The defendants contested the suit by filing written statement denying material allegations as contained in the plaint contending further that the suit was not maintainable, the order of termination was a termination simpliciter and the impugned order was lawfully passed.
4. The learned Assistant Judge on consideration of the evidence and other materials on record dismissed the suit. Against that the plaintiff-petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned District Judge, which was heard by the learned Subordinate Judge, Khulna who allowed