WP No. 26601 of 2009 __________ Page1 of 8 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W.P.No.26601 of 2009 L.Thiruvengada Moorthy 56, Sanjay Gandhi Street, Vivekananda Nagar, Chennai-118. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. Disciplinary Authority / Deputy Gen. Manager, Bank of Baroda, Zonal Office, Baroda Pride New No. 41, 3rd Floor, Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. 2. Appellate Authority / Executive Director Bank of Baroda Corporate Centre, Plot No. C-26 Block G, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051. 3. Revisional Authority / Chairman and Managing Director, Bank of Baroda, Baroda Corporate Centre, Plot No. C-26, Block G, Bandra Kurla, Complex, Bandra(East), Mumbai – 400 051. (Cause Title amended as per Order dated 10.03.2020 made in W.M.P.No.7213/2020 in W.P.No.26601/2009) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26601 of 2009 __________ Page2 of 8 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the First Respondent dated 16.02.2008 in CRO/PER/LTM/2008 and the consequential order dated 11.03.2009 in CRO/PER/LTM/2009 on the file of the 2nd Respondent and also order of the 3rd Respondent in letter dated 16.07.2009 in Disc/444/2009 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and not sustainable in law and direct the Respondents to the reinstatement of the Petitioner with all benefits. Prayer amended as per order 13.03.2018 by this Court in W.M.P.No.2613/2018 in W.P.No.26601/2009. For Petitioner(s): Ms.N.R. Jasmine Padma For Respondent(s): R1 – No appearance Ms.Revathi Manivannan for R2 & R3 ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 2 and 3. 2.Learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo before this Court on 20th July 2026, wherein the petitioner stated that since the criminal case registered against him has resulted in conviction, he may not succeed in the present writ petition filed challenging the order of dismissal from service dated https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26601 of 2009 __________ Page3 of 8 16.02.2008, as affirmed by both the Appellate Authority and the Reviewing Authority. 3.By the aforesaid memo, it is further stated that against the conviction awarded which has been affirmed in appeal, the petitioner has preferred Special Leave Petition [Crl.] before the Hon’ble Apex Court, and the said petition is pending consideration. 4.It is further stated in the memo that as the petitioner is presently aged about 62 years and suffers from various health issues rendering him unable to perform even his daily routine, he has been legally advised to settle the matter by claiming his eligible legal entitlements in terms of the respondents’ statutory rules and regulations in force. 5.On behalf of the respondents, it is contended that disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner were initiated for misappropriation, which constitutes grave misconduct under the service regulations of the respondents’ bank, leading to his dismissal from service. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26601 of 2009 __________ Page4 of 8 6.The respondents further contended that since the misappropriated amount involved public money, a criminal case was also registered against the petitioner and following a regular trial, the petitioner was convicted, and the sentence awarded was subsequently affirmed by this Court in Crl.A.Nos.1342 and 1352 of 2024. 7.It is further submitted by the respondents that the initiation of disciplinary proceedings was for misconduct under the service regulations, whereas the criminal case was registered for criminal offences. Thus, both are different. Even if the petitioner secures acquittal in the criminal case, the same would have no bearing on the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings. 8.On behalf of the respondents, it is further contended that the petitioner, having been dismissed from service on account of proven misconduct, he is not entitled to the benefits as being claimed. 9.In view of the aforesaid submissions, and taking note of the fact that the petitioner was dismissed from service for proven misconduct which stands fortified by his conviction in the criminal case, this Court is of the view that the orders passed by the Appellate Authority and the Reviewing Authority do not https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26601 of 2009 __________ Page5 of 8 call for any interference. Accordingly, the challenge to the disciplinary proceedings fails. 10.Insofar as the petitioner's claim regarding legal entitlements is concerned, there is nothing on record to show that such a claim was formally adjudicated or considered at any point in time earlier like Gratuity and Employees' share of Provident Fund contribution along with interest to which he may be entitled to claim under the rules. 11.In respect of the other claims made by the petitioner in the memo, the same need to be decided in accordance with the service rules and regulations of the respondents’ employer. 12.That being so, this Court considers it appropriate to grant liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondents’ authorities by making a suitable application claiming the benefits to which he is legally entitled, including the Employees' share of Provident Fund contribution. 13.On receipt of such application, the respondents shall consider and decide the petitioner's legal entitlements as per the service rules and regulations https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26601 of 2009 __________ Page6 of 8 of the respondents’ bank, and disburse the eligible amounts to the petitioner within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of the application. 14.Subject to above directions, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. 21-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No PAM https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26601 of 2009 __________ Page7 of 8 To 1. Disciplinary Authority / Deputy Gen Manager, Bank of Baroda, Zonal Office, Baroda Pride New No. 41, 3rd Floor, Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. 2. Appellate Authority / Executive Director Bank of Baroda Corporate Centre, Plot No. C-26 Block G, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051. 3. Revisional Authority / Chairman and Managing Director, Bank of Baroda, Baroda Corporate Centre, Plot No. C-26, Block G, Bandra Kurla, Complex, Bandra(East), Mumbai 400051. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26601 of 2009 __________ Page8 of 8 T.VINOD KUMAR, J. PAM W.P.No.26601 of 2009 21-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis