held that the misconduct alleged against the
respondent and held proved before it was not a misconduct of
minor or technical character as they were ... misconduct or charges of technical misconduct held
proved against the delinquent. One and only subject-matter
of Clause (g) is the misconduct of minor
Senior Counsel argued that the
allegation against the appellant is of minor misconduct that he did
not in violation of the Bank Circular dated ... argued that
Clauses 19.7, 19.8 and 19.9 thereof provide for minor misconduct
and punishment for minor misconduct. Since no specific charge to
the aforesaid effect
against the petitioner do not amount to misconduct muchless gross or minor misconduct within the meaning of paras 19.5 and 19.7 of the Bipartite Settlement ... settlement between gross and minor misconduct. While the punishments prescribed for gross misconduct are severe those prescribed for minor misconduct are less harsh. When, among
respondent no.1 to
impose punishment on the writ petitioner for minor
misconduct.
2. The writ petitioner was a cash clerk of the United Bank ... innocent mistake, do not constitute such
misconduct." In the instant case, the gross misconduct
and minor misconduct have been spelt out in clause
based on no
evidence. Penalty must have been only for minor misconduct.
The SBI Rules were not applicable since misconduct alleged
related to the period ... however, observed that the Bank could
impose punishment for minor misconduct as per Rules of Bank
of Cochin. The Writ Appeal preferred by the State
gross misconduct or minor misconduct. Intimidation to cause physical harm to superiors is not included in either gross misconduct or minor misconduct. The counsel ... that it is a misconduct already enumerated and it is a gross misconduct. This basis, itself is erroneous. This particular misconduct is neither enumerated
stating that the delinquency are only minor misconducts and even though the same are proved, dismissal is not warranted and the punishment imposed is highly ... held that even though the charges are proved, they are only minor misconducts and therefore the punishment of dismissal imposed against the first respondent
learned Senior counsel emphasized, that the petitioner was charged for a minor misconduct as contemplated under Clause 19.7(d), for which the penalty has been
committed an act of "gross misconduct" or of "minor misconduct" as defined below;provided that if the authority which ... superior.
(f) habitual doing of any act which amounts to "minor misconduct" as defined below. "habitual" meaning a course of action
appellate authority found that the proved charges would utmost amount to minor misconduct and the same will attract only minor punishment like warning, censure, withholding ... considered the misconduct of the second respondent as one of minor misconduct. Regulation 17(e) relates to "gross negligence of duty." Even though
