As per Show cause notice issued in December 2007,explanations were sought on misappropriation of funds aggregating Rs.15.43 lakhs on the basis of a special audit report of November 2007
In the charge sheet issued by the employer in April 2008,charges and allegations were leveled against fraud and misappropriation of funds aggregating Rs.15.43 lakhs
In the inquiry proceedings,Inquiry Authority had submitted his report in November 2008 to Disciplinary Authority as per which all the charges were 'PROVED" except Rs.2.73 lakhs as "NOT PROVED"
In the dismissal order of May 2009,it is mentioned that Rs.12.73 lakhs is misappropriated( 15.43 minus 2.73)
Appellate authority had rejected the appeal in October 2009 upholding the decision of Disciplinary Authority
In the order rejecting review petition in March 2013,the estimated loss was mentioned as Rs.2.19 lakhs only ( 15.42 lakhs minus 8.00 lakhs treated as not fraudulent/misappropriation minus recovery of Rs.5.23 from customers)
As per process note of Disciplinary Authority to Reviewing Authority,various entries aggregating Rs.8.00 lakhs is not fraudulent and that they are only procedural lapses.This point was discovered 4 years after dismissal by the management
Amount of Rs.2.73 lakhs absolved in the inquiry proceedings is not taken into account by Reviewing Authority to arrive at estimated loss
In other words,entries aggregating Rs.8.00 lakhs was alleged and proved to have been misappropriated as per show cause memo,charge sheet ,inquiry and dismissal order till October 2009 was considered as not fraudulent / not misappropriation of funds at the time of review petition in March 2013
Then,is the show cause notice , charge sheet ,inquiry findings and dismissal orders were in order when an amount of Rs.8.00 lakh was not fraudulent / misappropriation which came to the notice of bank after 4 years.Whether this point can be raised in the writ petition and if so under what reason( Is it non application of mind,defective charge sheet and defective inquiry proceedings)If any court decision is there on defective charge sheet kindly give the details of this case
