Replies To The Brief of The POwith Annexures and DEs

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012
(COMPLETELY SERVED ON:02-07-2012, AT BERHAMPORE, WEST BENGAL, ie. THE CURRENT RESIDENCE OF HIMADRI SHEKHAR BHATTACHARJEE) REPLIES OF SHRI HIMADRI SHEKHAR BHATTACHARJEE,(PF NO:58927), DEPUTY MANAGER,BO: SILCHAR, PREVIOUSLY, INCUMBENT IN CHARGE AT BO: LEKHAPANI.
SERIAL NO OF CHARGES.
MY REPLY.
CHARGE I-I
CASE NO: I A:These transactions, vide, ME-1,(M-155127,M-162832).both entered by Late CTO P.N.Chintey & verified by user id of myself, didnt require any post facto scrutiny, in view of : INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex.13, which, stipulates initiation of a transfer entry up to Rs25000, by CTO-B and its verification without post-facto scrutiny .Here,vouchers were prepared by Late P.N.Chintey and entered by him solely Late P.N.Chintey,has also tendered his confession along with deposit of Rs400000, to be appropriated towards consequences of his misdeeds,as per DE-5. I also submit a detailed report in connection with accessing of my password, as per annexure-1. So, the irregularity does not pertain to me. So, treat the charges as not proved. CASE NO: I B: Here, both the transactions were done by late P.N.Chintey, by using general and DB passwords of the undersigned, at opportune moments, when the undersigned had to venture out of the branch, for business developmental purposes .He has also tendered his confession alongwith deposit of Rs40000, to be appropriated towards consequences of his misdeeds,as per DE-5. The detailed report in connection with accessing of password of the undersigned, as per annexure-1, be also looked at. So, in view of this, charges presented here, by PO, be treated as not proved.
CHARGE I-2
Entry no M 67283 Dated 19.10.2009 undertaken by the late CTO, using my passwords and keeping undersigned in dark, modus operandi,as outlined in case of charge I(B), above. Regarding transaction no: M-81004, dated,20-10-09, it has to be said that,in passing the withdrawal, due diligence, as to tallying the signature on the payment instrument was tallied with the signature appearing on the signature slip(DE-8), IR comments regarding due diligence in conduct and operation of customenrs accounts, vide annexure 9, to the best application of reasonable prudence,be looked at..Payment voucher was duly preserved as can be seen by the relevant IR comments on annex. 9, be looked at.. So, the allegation that, the instrument contained forged signature of drawer, Mr. Dipak Baruah, be treated as not true.
MY REPLY.
Grand Total Brought Forward from page no:1 CHARGE-I- Regarding entry no:M 1350 Dated 10.12.2009 &M 2478 Dated 10.12.2009 ,entries were 3 undertaken by Late P.N.Chintey solely, keeping the undersigned in dark .This escaped scrutiny, since, the checking work was shared , in view of branch functioning with short of allotted staff strength. Late P.N.Chintey,has also tendered his confession along with deposit of Rs400000, to be appropriated towards consequences of his misdeeds,as per DE-5. .Payment voucher was duly preserved as can be seen by the relevant IR comments as, annex .11. A detailed report in connection with accessing of password of the undersigned, as per annexure-1, be looked at . So, the irregularity does not pertain to the undersigned.. So, the charges outlined here, be treated as not proved
CHARGE-I- a).ME-10 shows posting of an amount to the credit of Topa Das, 0169506, vide, M-168939,dated 11-02-10, done by late P.N.Chintey,entrusted with works related with pension at that time and in 4 doing so, he utilized the general user and DB user passwords of the undersigned. b)ME-12 shows debiting of suspense by Rs151306 and crediting sundry pensioners' account with Rs138296 and sundries account no:3171104, with Rs13010,vide, M-207531,dated 26-02-2010 .Here, late P.N.Chintey, used the DB password of the undersigned without his knowledge .It is vindicated by the fact that, he reversed this entry vide, M-313358,Dated -09.06.2010,long after I was relieved from this branch on 07-05-10. c)ME-11,shows,vide, M-159482,dated,26-02-10,a debit of Rs110399, to suspense(5711308) and credit of Rs93194 and Rs 17205, to sundry pensioner(shown in the charge sheet as 5711308, belonging to suspense) and sundries general,no:3171104, respectively. Here, he utilized both his user and DB passwords of the undersigned, without his knowledge. d)In ME-13,vide M-476731,dated,26-02-10,as cited by the PO,a/c no:3171104, sundries general debited by Rs17205&Rs13010, respectively, to a corresponding credit of Rs30215, to staff canteen account no:01-42493.. Here, as per DE-13(corresponds to ME-13,so not enclosed separately),no, corresponding transaction id was found by the undersigned. e) Here, the PO. cited vide,:ME-14(M-4720),about a debit of Rs302, to the canteen account no:01-42493, utilizing, the general user and DB user password of the undersigned and it escaped scrutiny, in view of late P.N.Chintey being the canteen manager and paltry amount concerned. f) Here, the PO, vide, ME-15,cited about debit of Rs977, to the account of Topa Das, in cash.. Late P.N.Chintey has also tendered his confession along with deposit of Rs400000, to be appropriated towards consequences of his misdeeds,as per DE-5. I also submit a detailed report in connection with accesing of my password, as per annexure-1.So, charges leveled here may be treated as not proved and not pertaining to the undersigned..
MY REPLY.
Grand Total Brought Forward From Page No:2 CHARGE-I-5 Here, PO cited the following transactions, having been entered: Particulars Dr. Particulars Cr. Amount Amount 178154 Sundry 153129 Pensioners. a)ME-17 Suspense M-217318 25025 Sundries 5711308 Dtd.05-04-10 A/C 3171104 b)ME-16 310182 Sundry 272047 M-409675 Pensioners. Suspense Dtd.05-04-10 5711308 24795 Sundries A/C 3171104 13340 Suspense 437386 Suspense 42537 5711315 d)ME-19 M-177482 5836 668720 047884, Dtd.08-04-10 A.K. Sonowal uspense a/c 5711308 31018 c)ME-18, Suspense M-66547 a/c Dtd.07-04-10 e)ME-20 M- Suspense 25320 a/c Dtd.21-04-10 5711315 Reference Remarks
249776 42537
Here, password of late P.N.Chintey was used to enter and password of DB user of the undersigned used to verify a transation where, excess amount after crediting sundry pensioners,resulting from error in calculation, kept at sundries from subsequent reversal and correction. Here, the charge levied by PO, lacks coherence .Debit total:443222, Credit total: 742275. Un tallied transactions are not accepted by the system.So,how it could constitute a charge, is not understood. Here, amount paid to pensioner/recipient of benefit .It got reversed through the above transaction vide, ME-19.So, no irregularity has occurred and it does not constitute a charge. Here, the password of DB user of the undersigned, used by late P.N.Chintey and it lend credence to the possibility of password hacking as per my submission regarding this, as per annexure-1, since, I was on approved leave as per screenshot of leave register of HRMS as per annexure-4
42537
Cash
42537
443841
Suspense a/c 57113
437386
Sundry a/c 6455 3171104
SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-I-5 Continued.
MY REPLY.
Here, PO cited the following transactions, having been entered: Reference Particulars Dr. Particulars Cr. Remarks Amount 13340 13340 Here,general user and DB user password of the undersigned, used f)ME-21 M-455073 24795 by late, P.N.Chintey, at opportune moments, when the undersigned, Dtd.05-04-10 Sundry a/c being the incumbent in charge, had 3171104 to venture out of branch on Staff g)ME-22 24795 business development purposes. canteen a/c M-460428 Further, using of both the 01-42493 Dtd.05-04-10 passwords of the undersigned, h)ME-24 6455 6455 while he was on leave, as per M-295755 screen shot of leave register of Dtd.21-04-10 HRMS, as per annexure-4, proves this. Regarding charge no:1:5, remarks against each transaction as cited by the PO above, using both the passwords of undersigned, by late P.N.Chintey, even while he was on approved leave, incoherent manner in which charge as per d) above, having been put by the PO and the fact that all those amounts ie. Rs 13340,Rs25025, Rs24795, being credited to the personal account of late P.N.Chintey, vide ME-34, my report on un authorized access to the passwords of the undersigned, as per annexure-1 and confession&deposit by late P.N.Chintey, as per DE-5,all proves that, charge levied here, be treated as not proved.,and not pertaining to the undersigned.
CHARGE-1:6
Reference a)ME-25,M436838 Dtd.01-06-09 b)ME-26,M160673, Dtd.05-08-09 c)ME-27,M3042,Dtd.0812-09
Particulars Dr. Particulars Amount Suspense a/c 5711308 Suspense a/c 5711310 3171160 29000
Cr. Remarks Amount The initiation of amout due to Madan Kalita due to a deposit with wrong particulars, on 2212-08, while the undersigned was on approved leave, as per annex.4.Then, it was reversed vide M-6448,dtd.30-03-09, by late P.N.Chintey, by a credit of the corresponding amount to the personal account of P.N.Chintey.So, the onus of paying the account holder
56241
SF 0129000 41290, Madan kalita 27241 Suspense a/c 5711310 56241
56241
CHARGE-1:6 Reference
Particulars
Dr. Amount
Particulars
Cr. Amount
Remarks
was on late P.N.Chintey and he utilized both the general user and DB password of the undersigned, at an opportune moment, since, being an incumbent, undersigned had to move out ot branch, frequently, on business developmental purposes. A detailed report on unauthorized access to incumbents passwords by late P.N.Chintey, vide, annex.1 and a written confession and deposit of money by late P.N.Chintey, as per DE-5, vindicate this. So, charges levied here, be treated as not proved. CHARGE1:7 Here, charge put forward by PO,vide, ME-28&ME-29, M-31070,dated 09-12-09 and M-2478, dated,10-12-09, respectively, shows that, late P.N.Chintey undertook this, utilizing the general user password in the first case and DB password of the undersigned in the second case, during moments, the undersigned ventured out of the branch on developmental purposes. A detailed report on this unauthorized access to the passwords of the undersigned and confession and deposit of money by late P.N.Chintey, vide, annex .1 and DE-5, proves this. So, the charge leveled here, be treated as not proved. CHARGE1:8 Here, charge put forward by PO,vide, ME-30&ME-32, M-269238,dated 06-04-10 and M-525074, dated,06-04-10, respectively, shows that, late P.N.Chintey undertook this, utilizing the both the general user password and DB password of the undersigned , during moments, the undersigned ventured out of the branch on developmental purposes. A detailed report on this unauthorized access to the passwords of the undersigned and confession and deposit of money by late P.N.Chintey, vide, annex .1 and DE-5, vindicate this. So, the charge leveled here, be treated as not proved. CHARGE:1:9 a) Here, keeping of the differential amount of Rs10117 in sundries,then, taking the amount from sundries to staff canteen account (of which late P.N.Chintey had the only operating authority) and thereafter, taking the amount, along with all the amounts elaborated in charge no:1:5, to the personal account of late P.N.Chinteys personal account, vide ME-31&ME-34,proves that, late P.N.Chintey did this, utilizing the general user password, DB user password of the undersigned as well as his own password, keeping the undersigned in dark and in opportune moments when the undersigned had to venture out of the branch on miscellaneous errands for being the branch manager. A detailed report on this unauthorized access to the passwords of the undersigned, as per annex.1,scrutiny of claims of individual items of pension scrolls in the branch and by the link branch, as per annex.5 and confession and deposit of money by late P.N.Chintey, vide, DE-5, and crediting of the amount in his personal account, proves this. So, the charge leveled here, be treated as not proved.
c)ME-27, Contd. Contd. From page no:4 M3042, Dtd.08-12-09
SERIAL MY REPLY. NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE NO:I-10 Dr. Particulars Amount a) M-26389, Suspense a/c 40500 Sundry Party dt,.26-08-09 5711313 pensioners. b)MSuspense a/c 104750 Suspense a/c 377272dt. 5711308 5771315 11-09-09 ( from 50288 upload) Suspense a/c 5711313 Reference Particulars Cr. Remarks Amount 40500 A genuine debit and credit of pensions due to pensioners. 155038 It was a bifurcation entry done to allocate the balance in upload amount to two reimbursement claims of pension pending at that time.Scrolls prepared by late,P.N.Chintey, in this regard, my report on scrutiny of individual items of pension scrolls,as per annex .5,be looked at. Link branch, after full scrutiny of the scroll sent with claim reimbursed it, which was appropriated here. The claim of Rs104750, as M-377272,above, reimbursed by the link branch vide M-331947,dtd.20-02-10.In this regard,provision on scrutiny of pension scrolls by the link branch as per annex.5,be looked at. It depicts an entry to appropriate pension claim reimbursement by the link branch.
Nonc)M416979,dtd. Customer A/C 03-12-09
50288
Suspense a/c 50288 5711313
d)M-414886 Non40500 Customer A/C3171160 So, in view of above entries,
Suspense 5711313
40500
a)&d) being undertaken to appropriate pension claim reimbursements to appropriate heads. b)&c), undertaken to appropriate amount lying at upload account to appropriate heads, by matching amounts outstanding at that time and reimbursement of pension claim to appropriate head respectively, Reimbursement of pension claims after checking pension claim scrolls prepared by late P.N.Chintey as entrusted with all works relating to pension and in view of detailed reports on scrutiny of individual items of pension scrolls,as per annex .5 &on scrutiny of pension scrolls by the link branch as per annex.5, charges elaborated here, be treated as not proved.
SERIAL NO MY REPLY. OF CHARGES. CHARGE NO:II-1 Here, the April10, pension scroll was stated to be inflated by inflated claim in 12 accounts, totaling Rs48051. Here, late, P.N.Chintey, undertook this, gaining unauthorised access to password of the undersigned, as per report on gaining unauthorized access to password of the undersigned, as per annex.1. Here the scroll didnt need scrutiny of individual items, only scroll totals were tallied with suspense totals, in view of my report on scrutiny of individual items of pension scrolls,as per annex .5. Moreover,the reimbursing link branch at Dibrugarh didnt raise any objection even after scrutiny of scrolls sent to them, in view of provision on scrutiny of pension scrolls by the link branch as per annex .5, To lend further credence to put the onus of the misdeed solely on P.N.Chintey, the disputed amount of Rs 48051 was reversed by entry no:M-321685 dtd.08-06-2010, long after I was relieved from this branch vide annex.42- regarding my transfer to silchar and reliveing from this branch on 07-05-10. In view of the above and DE-5, containing, confession statement and declaration about deposit of Rs400000, by late. P.N.Chintey, the charge leveled here, be proved as not proved and not pertaining to me. Here, the contention of the presenting officer, without delving deep into the matter was unfortunate .The May '10 pension claim was lodged 09-06-10 as per M-313358 dtd. 09.06.2010,much after the undersigned got relieved from this branch, on 07-05-10 as per,annexure 42 and it can very well be testified from the system itself. So, charge cited here, does not pertain to the undersigned and be treated as not proved. Date of SL. Account No; Amount original Dr. Remarks 1 5711315 0.5 11-09-2008 These originated during those wee hours of 2 1155 11-09-2008 migration of this branch to CBS during Sept08, while due to lack of training we were totally 3 575 26-09-2008 dependent on support personnel, so, these were kept 4 850 21-10-2008 pending and couldnt be appropriated till then. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total: 6041 948 781 40 400 430 9750 1504 22474.5 28-01-2009 28-01-2009 29-12-2008 28-01-2009 02-04-2009 28-04-2009 19-05-2009 29-06-2009 I was on approved leave , in this regard, screen shot of my leave register as per HRMS,as per annex.4,be looked at.
TA Bill Adv. To HSB. VC held Adv. For Xeroxing CBS Manual for the branch. . VC held Adv. For purchase of Computer peripheral VC not held Additional intt Paid on FD No VC
CHARGE NO:II-2
CHARGE NO:II-3
SERIAL NO MY REPLY. OF CHARGES.
CHARGE :II-3 continued.
Here, amounts pertaining to sl 1-4 were initiated during migration, mostly by the support personnel provided and we were mere onlookers at that time, merely grappling with an alien software, untrained. So, these, continued to stay outstanding and could not be appropriated. In case of entry no;5-8, those originated while I was on approved leave, as per annex.4.This vindicates the citing about hacking of password of the undersigned, as per report, marked as annexure I, be looked at. Entries in sl no:9,10&12, pertained to TA bill advance of undersigned duly elaborated in voucher held at the branch,Xeroxing CBS manual for the branch, also, elaborated on due voucher, held at the branch and differential interest paid due to less interest generated by system due to improper feeding during migration, respectively. Entry in sl. No,11, pertained to advance taken for purchase of one LCD monitor from the nearby town of Tinsukia since, there were no computer dealer at or near this place. Then, the task of reversing these were entrusted to P.N.Chintey,Though the same was correctly entered in physical SFF register, in this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, regarding proper updating of IT inventory, as per annex .6 and comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, on physical checking of SFF items, with SFF register,as per annex 7,be looked at.. Also, in this regard, details of the LCD monitor, lying at the branch stores as given in a handwritten chit written by PO,as per annex .8,be looked at. So, now it appears, that, late P.N.Chintey, adjusted the whole set of expenditures, against pension reimbursement of Rs 27241,dated 26-08-09, as outlined in the charge .Late P.N.Chinteys sole involvement gets proved in transfer of balance amount of Rs4766.50 to staff canteen account, which, he was solely authorized to operate as per the account opening form.in this regard, report on gaining unauthorized access to my passwords,as per annex.1,be looked at. The PO could not present any exhibit here, to substantiate charges levied here.DE-5regarding confession and deposit by late P.N.Chintey, admitting all his faults, be looked at. In view of the above, charges leveled here, be treated as not proved.
SERIAL NO MY REPLY. OF CHARGES. Reference Particulars Dr. Particulars Amount 962568 5711308 SuspensePension CIV 100071787 Santosh Kr. 5711308 Sengupta. SuspensePension CIV 400079397 Birman Gurung 400079397 Birman Gurung 01-65333, 400079397 30000 Dharam Birman Nath Prasad Gurung 100071787 30000 Santosh Kr. Sengupta. 01-65333, 60000 Cash Dharam Nath Prasad Cr. Remarks Amount 471419
30000
CHARGE:II-4
ME-35,M52608,dtd. 03-11-09
Here,erroneously, two excess credits made, which, are sought to be corrected by 431149 subsequent transactions . 30000
b)ME36 ,M431802,dtd. 03-11-09
60000
Then, in a bid to correct the matter, both the accounts debited to the credit of o165333 of Dharam Nath Prasad.
Now, Sri. Dharamnath Prasad withdrawn the amount vide, a duly signed credit cash voucher with a revenue stamp fixed thereon as an added security, considering the tendering of credit cash voucher, in view of non availability of withdrawal form in the branch, at that moment fetching of supply which took a while in view of remote location of the branch. In view of the above mentioned remarks against adjoining transactions, as cited by the PO,charge leveled here, be treated as not proved.
c)ME-37,M438361,dtd. 03-11-09
60000
10
SLOF MY REPLY. CHGES. CHARGE In reference to:a)-ME(38),(b)-ME(39),(c)-ME(40),Here,transactions videM 45138 Dated -III-1 20.10.2009,M 12541 Dated 20.10.2009 M 97426 Dated 20.10.2009,evoked no complaints from the concerned account holders and they were kept in sundries, in view of projected cash shortages on that day, after entering them to debits and anomalies in crediting pension receivables in appropriate beneficiaries accounts, coming to light subsequent to debiting them,respectively. So, amounts kept in sundries, pending cash arrangements and tracking of credits to their appropriate beneficiaries etc .thereafter, they were duly paid from sundries against signatures of account holders on the back of vouchers. In this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9,be looked at. Also,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.31&2),about updating of passbook as per annex.-10. be looked at. In view of the above, charges put forward here, by the PO, be treated as not proved.
CHARGE In reference to:a)-ME(41),(b)-ME(42),(c)-ME(43),Here,transactions videM 345454 Dated 27-01-III-2 10,M 331465 Dated 25-01-2010, M 350131 Dated27-01-2010, evoked no complaints from the concerned account holders and they were kept in sundries, in view of projected cash shortages on that day, after entering them to debits and anomalies in crediting pension receivables in appropriate beneficiaries accounts, coming to light subsequent to debiting them,respectively. So, amounts kept in sundries, pending cash arrangements and tracking of credits to their appropriate beneficiaries etc .thereafter, they were duly paid from sundries against signatures of account holders on the back of vouchers, there. in this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011(B.31&2),about voucher management,as per annex.11,be looked at. Also,in this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex-12, be looked at.So, no depositor put forward any complaint regarding wrongful debit from their accounts. In view of the above, charges put forward here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. CHARGE Here,transactions vide 33201 Dated 18.03.2009 constitute withdrawals which sometimes,kept in -III-3 sundries after their posting to the debits in apprehension of cash position .After fetching of cash from depositors or nearby branches, they are paid in cash thereafter, against signature of recipients on the cash voucher .None of the related account holders lodged any complaint regarding any transaction in their accounts, though, passbooks were regularly updated. In this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at.. So, charge put forward by the PO here, be treated as not proved.
11
SERIAL MY REPLY. NO OF CHAR GES. CHARGE- Regarding transaction vide,M 190098 Dated 17.06.2009, the related account belonged to an unit of Indian Army, where, monthly statements were regularly taken and put to III-4 strict checks, reconciliation procedures and annual audits by the defence accounts department. No, objection has been received by them regarding any entry in their account statement. .In consonance with their accounting system, they used to take cash payment of credits pertaining to previous year/half year and redeposit the same subsequently,so that, it do not get reflected in that year. Here, the same thing has been done, so it didnt evoke any complaint from that unit of Indian Army.In this regards, annex.10, containing comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2), about updating of passbook/account statements, be looked at. So, in view of the same, the charge leveled here, by the PO be treated as not proved. CHARGE Here,transaction vide,M 71430 Dated 09.07.2009, constituted withdrawal made, to NO:III-5 make payments to late P.N.Chintey for procuring stationery supplies for the branch, such as ribbon for printers, papers for printers etc. Which, he arranged since, there was no dealer dealing in these commodities at Lekhapani .Everything was mentioned, along with,signatures, on relevant vouchers, which were duly kept at the branch. In this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,marked as annex.14(Serial-3), on expenditure management &Annex. 9, containing comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, about voucher management, be looked at. So, in perspective of the same, charge leveled here, be treated as not proved. CHARGE- Here, the charges are denied. The FD holder, Suresh Kumar didnt have any savings III-6 account with our branch. So, the maturity proceeds of his fixed deposit (PR-201), was credited in staff canteen account no:0142493(ME-51,S-.48910685,dtd.09-07-2009). Then as Mr. Suresh Kumar requested us to give him Rs49000 by draft, fav. SENA WELFARE ORGANIZATION-INDIA, NEW DELHI(DE-14)(annex.60), out of maturity proceeds of the FD and pay him the fraction amount in cash, the proceeds were debited from staff canteen account(ME-52&ME-53,) and credited to sundries a/c no:3171104 for bifurcation of DD charges and breaking the amount as per his wish, so that, it could be paid to him in cash from sundries a/c no:3171104, taking his signature on the credit cash voucher(ME-55).In this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9,be looked at. So, in view of this, charge levied here by PO,be treated as not proved.
329652-50
12
SL OF MY REPLY. CHGS. CHARGE Here, since,as and when this branch became short of supplies of stationery , it had to be got -III-7 printed from local sources, in view of time lag in getting the supply from RSDC,Guwahati, which were arranged by late P.N.Chintey, who was a resident of this area. Here,(ME-54,55,M199532dtd.25-08-2009,&M-278353,dtd25-08-2009, respectively),kept in sundries and then withdrawn in cash and paid to P.N.Chintey for onward payment against signature on the back of voucher and due bill from the supplier enclosed therein, as can be seen from the comment on the voucher of M-199532(highlighted), as per annexure,59. Also, in this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9, and comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,marked as annex.14(Serial-3), on expenditure management, be looked at.. So, in perspective of the same, charge levied here, by PO be treated as not proved. CHARGE Here, transactions,ie.M 45632(ME-56), Dated 03.09.2009 & M 82876 (ME-57), dated 03.09.2009 , were initiated by the late CTO and got verified by the undersigned, in pursuance with the -III-8 INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006, without post-facto scrutiny, as per annex.13. So, charge leveled here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. CHARGE Here the transaction vide,M 438349(ME-58),dated 07.09.2009&M 443530 Dated 07.09.2009, were initiated to take the amount and get it credited to late CTOs account, since, for being a localite, he, -III-9
sometimes, used to pay the money intended to be withdrawn by account holders, on his own, when they were in a hurry or cash position was short .He took repayments, back, later on, as here,the amount was debited to SF-0169506,Topa Das, due to apprehension about cash shortfall on that day and then paid by late P.N.Chintey from his own pocket, later on taken back by him by crediting directly from sundries .Though, the manner it was executed didnt adhere to banking customs and usage, it had no malafide intent. That is why, no objection has been raised by the concerned account holder in connection with this transaction,even if, he used to have his passbook, updated regularly .In this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at. So, in perspective of the same, charge levied by PO, here, be treated as not proved.
CHARGE Transaction vide id M 284486 Dated 08.09.2009(ME-60)&M 333864 Dated 08.09.2009(ME-61),were undertaken in view of the fact that, carpenters were not available in this barren place and to get the termite -III-10 infested ceiling and furniture repaired, sometimes, carpenters from MES were to be cajoled in by paying them paltry pocket money and sometimes, late CTO, for being a localite, arranged for getting the things repaired. As, in this case, since, P.N.Chintey got those wooden repairing done, from cajoling in a labourer from MES, the quoted charges were paid to him and he made final payments to the laborer. Of course, duly signed vouchers were taken. In this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9& comments at relevant IR dated 23-122009,marked as annex.14(Serial-3), on expenditure management, be looked at.be looked at..So, charges leveled here be treated as not proved.
13
SLOF CHGS.
MY REPLY.
CHARGE-III-11 Here, transactions vide, M 64757,dated 18.09.2009(ME-62),M- 344098 Dated 24.09.2009(ME-63), were initiated by the late P.N.Chintey, CTO-B and got verified bythe undersigned, in pursuance with the INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006, marked as annex .13, which didnt require post-facto scrutiny. 1. Moreover, the account belonged to an unit of Indian army and subjected to stringent scrutiny and auditing by the defence accounts departments, they also, used to take statements regularly and got them reconciled with their cash books, besides audits at theirs. But, on no occasion, they raised any objection in connection with the cited transaction. 2. In this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at.. So, charge leveled here, by PO,be treated as not proved. CHARGE-III-12 Here, transaction(ME-64), vide M 210325 Dated 09.10.2009, was entered by the late CTO and got verified by in pursuance to circular no::INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006, marked as annex .13, which needed no post-facto scrutiny. The transaction no M 261927 Dated 09.10.2009(ME-65),was also initiated by the late CTO, using my password, access to which gained as per report on gaining unauthorized access to my passwords,marked as annex.1,. 1. But, the account holder lodged no complaint , in spite of the fact that,they used to come to the branch every month and got their passbook updated. Moreover,the affected account no:01-22713 belonged to Kendriya Vidyalaya, which was subjected to stringent periodical audits and accounting procedures and no objection was raised by them regarding entries in their pass books .In this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.31&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at.. Thus, in view of above, charge leveled here by the PO, be treated as not proved. CHARGE-III-13 The transaction vide M 117506 Dated 19.10.2009,(ME-66),M 171301 Dated 19.10.2009 (ME-67),were undertaken by late P.N.Chintey, utiizing both the general user password and DB password of the undersigned, at an opportune moment,in this regard, report on gaining unauthorized access to my passwords,as per annex .1&DE-5, confession statement and declaration about deposit of Rs400000, by late. P.N.Chintey.be looked at. So, the charge levied here, by PO,be treated as not proved. . CHARGE -IIIHere, transaction, vide ME-68, M-121792 Dated 19.10.2009,debiting 01-75251 of Surti 14-a) Devi and keeping an amount of Rs4870 to 3171104 Sundries General, was undertaken to In this regard,IR put pressure on the account holder/pensioner, since, her life certificate was pending objection about since,01-11-2008. Then, on receipt of assurance from her, to deposit the desired life pending life certificate certificates, the same amount was directly paid to her from sundries(ME-67), in cash, of Surati Devi, got taking her signature on the cash credit voucher, which was kept on record .That is why, no cited vide, annex.15, as objection received from the concerned account holder/depositor against entries in her she was late in passbook which was kept updated every month..In this regard, comments at relevant IR submitting the same dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook, as annex.10and comments at even after this, be relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9,be looked at.So, looked at.
14
SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-14b)
MY REPLY. Reference Particulars Dr. Particulars Cr. Remarks Amount Amount a)ME-69,M- CA-2215 192 Sundries 192 Here, on a report by 278094 OF Dutta 3171104 customer about a wrong d td.22-10-09 Enterprise credit sought to be rectified by debiting the account and keeping the amount in sundries for further tracking and appropriation. Cash 192 Here, late P.N.Chintey did b)ME-70,M- Sundries 192 this and got verified by user 46615,24-10- 3171104 password of undersigned 09 since, as per INSPECTION &AUDIT DIVN. CIRCULAR NO:15/2006, as per annex.1,it needed no Post-facto scrutiny. So, charge levied here, be treated as not proved. Reference Particulars Dr. 5236 a)ME71,m30046,dtd. 24-10-09 SF0176083, D.S.Sonar 014796 71787,SK Sengupta Particulars CRM. Remarks Amount Sundries 10032 This was done by 3171104 late,P.N.Chintey and got verified by the general user password of the undersigned, since,it didnt require post-facto scrutiny as per,INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex.13 Cash 10032 Here, late P.N.Chintey undetook this using both the general and DB password of the undersigned.in this regard, report on gaining unauthorized access to my passwords,as per annex.1,be looked at
CHARGE-III-15
b)MESundry a/c 10032 72,M3171104 140252,dtd .24-10-09
So, in view of above, charge leveled here, by the PO, be treated as not pertaining to the undersigned and not proved.
15
(COMPLETELY SERVED ON:02-07-2012, AT BERHAMPORE, WEST BENGAL, ie. THE CURRENT RESIDENCE OF HIMADRI SHEKHAR BHATTACHARJEE) REPLIES OF SHRI HIMADRI SHEKHAR BHATTACHARJEE,(PF NO:58927),
SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-16
DEPUTY MANAGER,BO: SILCHAR, PREVIOUSLY, INCUMBENT IN CHARGE AT BO: LEKHAPANI.
MY REPLY.
ME-73&ME-74: The transaction vide M 189875 Dated 28.10.2009 Dated 28.10.2009,&M
CHARGE-III-17
149749 Dated 29.10.2009 , were entered by the late CTO and got verified by using the user id and passwords of the undersigned,and it didnt require any post -facto scrutiny.in this regard, report on gaining unauthorized access to my passwords,as per annex.1,and INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex.13 be looked at ME-75&ME-76: Here the transaction vide,M ,146414, Dated 28.10.2009&M 306901 Dated 30.10.2009 , were undertaken by the CTO on his own, at the most opportune moment when the undersigned had to go out of branch on business developmental purposes and here he, used own general password and both the general and DB password of the undersigned, in this regard, report on gaining unauthorized access to my passwords,as per annex.1,and written statement of late P.N.Chintey, confessing his misdeeds and about depositing an amount of Rs400000, as per DE-5,be looked at.. Thus, the charge levied here, by the PO,be treated as not proved. Entry cited here,was an innocent adjusting entry, causing loss to no entity,due voucher was prepared with all the details and kept at branch records.In this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9,be looked at. So, charge levied here,by the PO, be treated as not proved.
CHARGE-III-18
CHARGE-III-19
ME77&ME78:Here,due to the remote location of the branch, no carpenter was available in the vicinity, late,P.N.Chintey,by virtue of being a localite, used to cajole carpenters from nearby MES office to get the repairs at the branch done.The money was kept in sundries account, later, they garnered some sort of signature on the voucher and get the payment, since, they could not sign on the voucher for their permanent employment with MES. Here, exactly same thing was done, vide these transactions. But, vouchers were duly prepared and kept on record. In this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-122009,about voucher management,as per annex.9,be looked at. So, charges leveled here, by the PO, be Particularsnot proved. Particulars Cr. treated as Reference Dr. Remarks Amount a)ME-79, Sundry 2565 Due, to a confusing which M 244058 Partties68) developed about deducting 495 Dated a/cs of collection charges @45 24.11.2009 from old age pension recipients the entire b)MESundries a/c 2565 Cash proceeds kept in sundries 3060 80,M3171104 495 till clear cut guidance 246784 received from CO.Then, dtd.26-11they were refunded directly 09 by taking their signatures on the back of credit cash VR.. Vouchers were duly kept,in this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9,be looked at.So, charges levied here,be treated as not proved. Amount 2565 Sundries 495 3171104
CHARGE-III-20
16
MY REPLY.
Reference
Particulars Dr. Particulars Cr. Remarks Amount Amount 01-36021 40203 Sundries 32401 Here, the transation was a)ME-81, HC Saikia 3171104 undertaken to offset wrong M29047 credits of terminal benefits to 262968,dtd 01-76199 21245 01-36021 HC Saikia & 01-76199 Parbati .26-11-09 Parbati Devi, by Rs40204&Rs2 Devi 1245, to be credited to other pensioners,byRs32401& Rs29047 respectively. This also explain the difference in installments in debit and credit sides(debits bifurcated to match the claim of rightful recipients).
Here, late P.N.Chintey .paid these amounts to rightful 29047 29047 beneficiaries, by taking their signatures on the back of the cash voucher. In both the above cases ie.case,a) and case b), due vouchers with all details and the relevant cash vouchers were duly prepared and kept in branchs records .In this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9& comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011,,about voucher management,as per annex .11,be looked looked at. Due to this, no official complaint has been received regarding any anomaly of the entries in their respective passbooks,which were immediately updated with their every visit for any transaction undertaken, in this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.31&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at. Thus, charge levied here, by the PO,be treated as not proved.
Sundries b)ME3171104 82,M12287,0412-09
32400
Cash
32400
17
SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-22 contd.
MY REPLY.
Reference a)ME-83M335327 Dtd.01-12-09
Particulars
01-36021 HC Saikia
Dr. Particulars Amount 46267 01-36021

HC Saikia Sundry Deposit 3171104
Cr. Remarks. Amount 40203 Here, in reconciliation of 6064

anomalies in crediting this account, more excess credit found and this entry passed to reverse enry no M 262968 Dated 26.11.2009 & set off excess credit by Rs6064.
Then, here,the due beneficiary, in whose case less credit was accorded, was given cash payment of the same, taking his signature on the back of the credit cash voucher. In the above case, ie. case no:b), cash payment was given to the beneficiary, as demanded by the pensioner,but, due vouchers were prepared with all the details written on them and due signatures taken on the reverse of the cash voucher and kept on banks record.In this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10&comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-20109,about voucher management,as per annex .9 be looked at.
M-379942 Dtd.01-12-09
b)ME-84
Sundry Deposit 3171104
6064
Cash
6064
Thus, charge levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. Reference CHARGE-III-23. ME-85, M-259522,dtd. 11-12-09 Particulars Dr. Particulars Amount Sundries 1310 Cash 3171104 Cr. Amount 1310
Here, late P.N.Chintey paid back collection charges, hitherto deducted from old age pensioners and got verified without post-facto Scrutiny by the password of the undersigned, in view of INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex.13. In view of the same, charges leveled here, be treated as not proved. ME-86&ME:87: Here,an amount of Rs2916, debited to the Imprest Account (no:21-941), an CHARGE-III-24
account belonging to an unit of Indian Army. As per, their accounting method,any credit not pertaining to latest accounting year couldnt be shown in their latest account and due to the lag effect in collection of instruments deposited in their account, this amount debited,kept in sundries and paid to them in cash against credit cash voucher, debiting sundries account, taking signature and seal on the reverse of the voucher,duly kept in banks records. In this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9,be looked at.That is why, no objection has been put forth by army authorities, concurring with the entrite in their statements, which they regularly took and scrutinized and subjected to strict audits by defense accounts departments.In this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at. Thus, charge leveled here, be treated as not proved.
18
MY REPLY.
CHARGE-III-26
Station Commander gave authority to Dr. their a/c for Rs. 709185.00 for payment Civilian Employee. Their instruction was executed on 21.10.2009 vide transaction ID no. M209080.The concerned account was the account of army and all official payments and receipts of concerned army unit was undertaken through this unit. So, this was subjected to rigid checks and follow ups and periodical audits by defence accounts department. The concerned payment was made by making a draft by putting the amount in canteen account, since he didnt have any account with the branch and sundry general balance had to be kept to minimum as per instructions of CO. .Had it not been paid to the beneficiary,Mr. M.K.Sinha, the army authorities, monitoring the account and taking updated statements regularly, would have raised a complaint, which has not been made by them. It proves that, contrary to what has been cited here, the mentioned payment reached the beneficiary In this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at.So, charge leveied here by PO be treated as not proved. M 248303 Dated 01.01.2010:The concerned entry was initiated by the CTO,late, P.N.Chintey, on his own and verified by the undersigned, without any post-facto scrutiny, in adherence to the circular no:INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006, marked as annex .13. So, charge levied here, doesnt pertain to me and be treated as not proved. a. ME-89,M-31011, Dated 22-10-09,income head hundian debited and the 21941,Imprest A/c was credited, since,that account belonged to an unit of India army and they enjoyed a charge free status. b. ME-90,M-205996,dtd.12-03-2010, imprest a/c was debited for Rs 2795 and credited to sundries a/c 317104. c. ME-91,M-279256 dated 12-03-2010, sundry a/c 3171104 was debited for Rs 2795 and credited to staff canteen a/c 01-42493. On receipt of a letter from army authorities about this credit appearing in accounts, which constituted a reversal of hundian deducted earlier, it was to be debited to their account and re credited to hundian ..Physical voucher prepared by late .P.N.Chintey and associated enclosures,, as per,annexure-18, shows exactly this,but, system voucher shows credit to staff canteen account ,01-42493. Late .P.N.Chintey did this, using the general user password DB password of the undersigned and his general user password,when the undersigned ventured our of the branch on developmental purposes, in this regard,Annex.1.containing report on gaining unauthorized access to my passwords, be looked at.Also,DE-5, confession statement and declaration about deposit of Rs400000, by late.P.N.Chintey, be looked at. Moreover,transaction videM 205996 Dated 12.03.2010 was undertaken and got verified by late P.N.Chintey within the power accorded to CTO-B, as per INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex.13.Thus, charge levied here, by PO do not pertain to me and be treated as not proved.
CHARGE-III-27
19
MY REPLY.
CHARGE-III-28
Reference Particulars ME-92, Sundries a/c M290001, 3171104 dtd. 28-04-10
Dr. Particulars Cr. Remarks Amount Staff Amount Here, the amount deducted on account of collection 2070 cantten a/c 2070 01-42493 charges from sundry old age pensioners, was kept at staff canteen a/c , till clearcut guidelines received about debiting as such, from CO.
Thereafter, these were duly refunded back to all the pensioners, taking their signatures on the reverse of the payment voucher and due cash payment vouchers kept on re cord..In this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011,,about voucher management,as per annex.11,be looked at.Thus, charge levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. Reference CHARGE-III-29 Particulars Dr. Amount Particulars Staff Canteen a/c 0142493 Cr. Amount 630
a)ME-93, M-132318 Sundry a/c 280 dtd.24-12-2008 3171104 150 200 b)ME-94 ,M-399803 Sundry a/c 280 dtd. 26-12-08 3171104 150
Staff Canteen a/c 0142493
430
.Here, entries in pursuance with a)&b),were initiated utilizing password of the undersigned (and the deputed officer, Sri.S.R.Choudhury),in spite of. the undersigned being on approved medical leave and Mr. S.R.Choudhuryand two other ,officers, deputed there .Again,the fact that, password hacking was regularly resorted to by not deactivating the same by the CO even after sanctioning of approved leaves and providing relievers in lieu, gets vindicated here .Surprisingly,in transaction, M-399803, in b) above,password of the undersigned and the password ot the officer deputed in the place of the undersigned, got used simultaneously, how this, evident on the printouts of reports generated escaped attention appears amazing. In this regard,following DE s may please be looked at,which shows that, during this timeframe, 3 officers were deputed in my place, in view of the protracted leave of the undersigned.: 1. DE-3-Attendance Registers for Dec'08,Jan09&Feb09,annex.17,Copy of leave extension letter to CO.& screen shot of leave register as per HRMS,as per annex .4, 2. Prescription of Dr.S.Mukherjee,among medical prescriptions of annexure -2 Now, how the password of the undersigned was used during this timeframe, inspite of the fact, that, it was revealed on printouts of reports generated by the system and known to the CO? It vindicates the fact of password hacking by making it dot to serve vested requirements. So, in view of the same, charges leveled here, be treated as not pertaining to the undersigned and not proved.
20
MY REPLY.
a. ME-95,M 51277 Dated 23.03.2009 , here, the account of G.Lakra was a validly opened and KYC compliant account,complete with all related documents and with due mandate of all those concerned, funds were transferred to this account .This is proved by non-figuring about this account in relevant IR as per annex.20(List of non-KYC compliant a/cs) & regarding morning checkhing and adherence to KYC norms and retaining due AOFs,annex .21(item 10.1)be looked at...In fact,here, the transfer was effected with due madate of the transferee and all vouchers were duly prepared with all signatures and information's on them and kept in branchs records.The transferee, B.Urang raised no objection inspite of getting updated passbooks regularly, bears testimony to this.In this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at.Also, annex 9&11, pertaining to IR comments about voucher management be looked at, proving that, duly prepared vouchers with all detils and signatures, were available at the branchs records. b.ME-96,G.Lakra, a/c no:01-81492, was debited by Rs24143, vide, M-95789 23.03.2009 and this amount was kept at sundries a/c3171104 Dated
c.ME-97,K.Konwar, a/c no:01-64972, was debited by Rs1185, vide, M-62227 Dated 24.03.2009 and this amount was kept at sundries a/3171104 d.ME-98, late, P.N.Chintey, a/c no:93-1860, was debited by Rs4472, vide, M-404487 Dated 24.03.2009 and this amount was kept at sundries a/3171104 e.ME-99,Sundries, a/c no:3171104, was debited by Rs1185,Rs24143,Rs4472 vide, M-413335 Dated 24.03.2009 and this amount was credited at sundries a/3171104 f.ME-97,P.N.Chintey, a/c no:93-1860, was debited by Rs10000, vide, M-419304 Dated 24.03.2009 and this amount was kept at sundries a/3171104 g.ME-101,Sundries, a/c no:3171104, was debited by Rs39000, vide, M-218513 Dated 26.03.2009 and this amount was credited to the a/c of Rakesh Kumar, 01-0354 Here, Mr. Rakesh Kumar was a jawan of 402 Field ambulance, a medical unit of Army, which, used to receive their salary from this branch .His salary deposit was held up at the branch due to wrong submission of details and got mingled with above accounts ie.0181492 G Lakra,01-64972 &K Konwar,along with the account of P.N.Chintey .So, all the accounts were debited with appropriate amounts and credited the account of Rakesh Kumar, when he produced proper identification documents from his unit and the payment was made to him when the unit a/c got transferred to SBI, Margherita.This also got vindicated by the fact that, no concerned a/c holder raised any objections when their passbooks were updated regularly this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-122009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at.Also,annex.29.cash deposit slip of Mr. Rakesh Kumar,402,FD.Ambulance, revealing his identity,belooked at.. So, in view of this, charge leveled by the PO, here, be treated as not proved.
21
MY REPLY.
CHARGE-III-32
Regarding transfer of entries to sundries provision, by late P.N.Chintey,on the day, when, everybody at the branch was busy and it was difficult to adhere to established norms on checking and the incumbent was busy contacting depositors, in a bid to shore up the deposit figure of the branch, a bit more. But, it shows that it was an inadvertent error, causing no loss of revenue to the bank and resulted in credit balance appearing in expenditure account, which got transferred to Head Office on closing of books on 31-03-2010 .In this regard,Annex.24.citing copy of revenue account as on 31-03-2010, be looked at.In this regard, Annex.1. On gaining unauthorized access to my passwords &DE-5, pertaining to confession statement and declaration about deposit of Rs400000, by late.P.N.Chintey be looked at .The Sundry general entry of Rs. 5449.00 getting reversed on 10.04.2010 & Credited to the a/c of Champakali Bhattacharjee, it has to be said, that, as per Annex.22,ie. xerox copy of demand draft of Champakali Bhattacharjee, handed over to late. P.N.Chintey,for collection, was credited by debiting sundry provision, where many entries fromnon customer account got parked, as per remarks pertaining to charge III-49. Regarding credit of Rs5449, to the account of Champakali Bhattacharjee,it constituted the proceeds of draft as per annex .22-.xerox copy of demand draft of Champakali Bhattacharjee. handed over to P.N.Chintey, for arranging collection and deposit to the account. Her account was opened with all sorts of documents and duly handed over to daftary/substaff. It might have got misplaces later on.So, charges leveled here, may be treated as not proved. 1. Here, the withdrawal pertaining to M 119090(ME-103), Dated 17.02.2009 in the account of Vidyalaya Nidhi, no:01-68011, for 3039.00 was initiated by CTO-B and then verified by the undersigned, without Post Facto' scrutiny by supervising officer/incumbent,in pursuance with INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex .13at. 2. Moreover, the account belonged to Kendriya Vidyalaya, Lekhapani, they used to take updated passbooks regularly and that was subjected to bank reconciliation's and audits and they never raised any objection regarding any entry in their passbook .This proves all the transactions in their accounts were genuine .In this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at.Thus, charge levied here, by PO,be treated as not proved. 3. All the vouchers duly held at branch and the observation at IR dated 23-12-2009as per annex .9, in connection with voucher management at the branch speaks all about this. Thus, in view of the above, charge levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. The concerned voucher,denoted by M-76837(ME-104), dated 27.04.2009,account no:01-79859 of Tirap Gate NRHM Fund, duly found in the branch while, the undersigned,being mandated by the CO to look into the system, went there, with Mr. Gulati,during December 2010 .In the remarks call dated 29-11-10, it was stated already. .Moreover, it was a government account and subjected to regular audits and in no occasion they disapproved any entry in their passbooks, which were regularly updated,in this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at.So, charges levied here, by PO, be treated as not proved.
CHARGE-III-33
22
MY REPLY.
1.ME-105,in connection with two withdrawals of Rs.2000.00 in A/c no 01-71787 of S K Sengupta vide M 150781 Dated 23.07.2009, they were made The transactions have been verified without Post Facto' scrutiny by supervising officer/incumbent,in pursuance with INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex .13, be looked at. 2. The concerned account holder took updated passbook regularly and never raised any question regarding validity of entries appearing therein. 3. in this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex .9,&comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at. Thus, charge levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. In connection with the withdrawal of Rs 2000(ME-106), in the account of Rupa Singh,a/c no:01-42396, vide M No:M 329735, Dated 27.08.2009,was wrongly made, it should have been, for Rs200 and it was offset by a contra credit of Rs1800 on 29-08-09 and the system deducted an interest of Re1 on this account Moreover,the transaction have been verified without Post Facto' scrutiny by supervising officer/incumbent,in pursuance with INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex .13, be looked at ..So, charge levied by PO, here, be treated as not proved. a. ME-107,M-178552,dated 24-09-2009, Tirap Gate Account debited with Rs1400. During this day, undersigned was on approved leavein this regard, screen shot of my leave register as per HRMS,as per annex.4,be looked at. This vindicates the report about password hacking by making it dot as per annex .1. b. ME-108.In connection with the withdrawal of Rs.7581.00 vide, M-227936, on 04.11.2009 in A/c no 01-0345 of Bonti Moni Singh, a pensioner, due vouchers were kept along with all the details and the customer, though, took updated passbooks regularly, never raised any complaint regarding entries appearing therein, during the tenure of the undersigned, till 07-05-2010 .In this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at c. ME-109 In connection with the withdrawal of Rs. 11250.00 made on 04.11.2009 in A/c no 01-72050 of RS Sonar, a pensioner, vide, M 57357 Dated 27.11.2009 due vouchers were kept along with all the details and the customer, though, took updated passbooks regularly, never raised any complaint regarding entries appearing therein In this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex .9,&comments at relevant IR dated 23-122009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at. Moreover,the transactions in b) and c),have been verified without Post Facto' scrutiny by supervising officer/incumbent,in pursuance with circular no:INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as anne.13.Thus, charge levied here, be treated as not pertaining to the undersigned and not proved.
CHARGE-III-35
CHARGE-III-36
23
MY REPLY.
1. ME-110&111. .Regarding debit of account no. 01-75172 of pensioner Shri S C Dhar on 29.12.2009 in two entries of Rs16926. and Rs.1300.00 and the credit of total amount of Rs18226. to Staff Canteen account and subsequent debit of staff canteen account to cash, it is stated that the transactions had been undertaken by late P.N.Chintey and got verified by the use password of the undersigned without Post Facto' scrutiny,in pursuance with circular no:INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex .13 2. But no concerned account holder raised any complaint since, their passbooks were regularly updated,.in this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011,about updating of passbook,as per annex-12, be looked at.It vindicates that, there was no irregularity pertaining to these transactions .Thus, charges levied here, be treated as not proved. ME-112&ME-113. Regarding a debit on 04.01.2010 a sum of Rs.3000.00 to SF account no. 01-69506 of Tapa Das and credit to SF account no. 01-42493-Staff canteen, vide M 225979 dated 04.01.2010 and its subsequent withdrawal from canteen account vide M 255742 dated 04.01.2010, it is to state that, all these transactions have been undertaken by late P.N.Chintey, using his general user password and got verified by the DB password of the undersigned. In pursuance with INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex .13. The concerned customer, Topa Das, has raised no objection in spite of having his passbook updated all the time and it proves the genuineness of this transaction. Due cash voucher with his signature thereron was kept in banks records. in this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011,about voucher management,as per annex.11,&comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011,about updating of passbook,as per annex-12, be looked at. Thus, charge levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. ME-114. Regarding the withdrawal of Rs.8000 made on 07.05.2009 from A/c no. 0158801 of Shri M K Pandu, a pensioner, vide, M56582 dated 07.05.2009, no objection was raised by the concerned pensioner, who visited the branch every month to get his pension and withdrawals updated in his passbook. Moreover, due cash voucher with his signature thereon was duly kept in the branch .Here, late P.N.Chintey initiated the transaction with his general user password and got it verified by the DB password of the undersigned and it didnt require post-facto scrutiny. In this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9,and .INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex.13, be looked at. Thus, charge levied here, by the PO,be treated as not proved.
CHARGE-III-38
CHARGE-III-39
24
MY REPLY.
Charges leveled here are denied. Regarding the advance of Rs.5600.00 for purchase of computer peripheral, vide, M 398170 Dated 05.06.2009, to purchase one laser printer for the branch. That printer was duly purchased and the concerned voucher with bill from the supplier, was made and kept on records and the transaction got reversed by entry no:M407031 Dated 25.09.2009(though,the undersigned was on leave, bill and voucher given to late P.N.Chintey,much before,was used on that day for reversal and got verified by using general password of the undersigned, vindicating the report on hacking of password, as per annex.1) , debiting SFF.That printer is still there at the branch and checked physically during inspection as per annex. 7. In this regards, following exhibits may please be looked at: 1. Comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9, 2. Printout of SFF statement from CBS, as per DE-1, 3. Comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,marked as annex.14(Serial-3), on expenditure managements , 4. Comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, on physical checking of SFF items, with SFF register,as per annex.7 and 5. Comments at IR about computer functions, as per annex.6,be looked at
CHARGE-III-41
Thus, in perspective of the above, charge levied here, by PO, be treated as not proved. ME:117,M-383675 dtd.23-09-2009: .Regarding unauthorized Cash Dr. of Suspense a/c (5711315) on 23.09.2009 vide M 383675 for Rs. 9000.00 , I was on leave on that day.in this regard, screen shot of my leave register as per HRMS,as per annex.4,and , report on gaining unauthorized access to my passwords,as per annex.1,be looked at Thus, charges levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. ME-119,M-261927,dtd. 09-10-2009, the charge saysCr. To Sundries a/c through Dr. of various office establishment accounts on 09.10.2009 vide M No 261927 for Rs. 4600.00 & subsequent Cash withdrawal details of which not available. Credit Cash VC not available. VC Passed by HSB But,this does not correspond to the contention of PO that, no voucher was found in the branch .Voucher with all details and signatures of payees were prepared and kept in the record of the branch .in this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex .9,be looked at. Thus, charges leveled here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. ME-118&120, M-116551,M-22251,dtd.11-11-09&27-11-09: Here, sometimes, due to incorrect insertion of interest rates by the support personnel provided, during migration into, CBS, system gave less interest against contracted interest rates, shortfall had to be paid to customers, by debiting suspense, later on got rectified and suspense reversed. Details given on concerned voucher which are invariably made .In this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9,be looked at.
CHARGE-III-42
CHARGE-III-43
25
MY REPLY.
Here, the transaction vide:M200140 Dated 17.03.2009, was undertaken by late. P.N.Chintey,here the general user password of himself and general user password of undersigned were used by him at an opportune moment, when,the undersigned,by dint of working as the branch incumbent,had to venture out of the branch, on several business developmental purposes This gains credence, in view of the fact, that, the cash voucher didnt contain any signature of the passing officer, ie. the undersigned, . More so, during these wee hours of migration to CBS, this branch suffered for considerable period, due to extremely poor connectivity and very often, printouts of reports could not be generated regularly and cash vouchers had to be checked with the physical cashiers long book, where Rs 46000 was recorded .In this regard, following reports be looked at: 1. In this regard, report on gaining unauthorized access to my passwords,as per annex .1,& DE-5, about confession statement and declaration about deposit of Rs400000, by late.P.N.Chintey.be looked at. 2. Annex .25, cash voucher of Md Shahid, a/c no:01-7515 3. Annex.26,SWOT Analysis in IR Dated 23-12-2009.
CHARGE-III-45
Thus, in perspective of the above, charge levied here, by PO, be treated as not proved. ME-122,M-105550,dated 24-10-2008&M-113663,dated 10-12-2008 .Here, the widow of Late Nikunja Debnath, vide her letter as per Annex .27(which lacks coherence, as per highlighted portions of the letter), has admitted about withdrawing money from her husbands a/c, putting her thumb impression, even while her husband was alive .from her husbands a/c. 1. That act of misrepresentation on the part of the widow of late Nikunja Debnath, got overlooked and passed by the undersigned in view of clause 36(highlighted) of Chapter:XXXII of book of instructions, annexure 58, regarding payment of pension to a sick and incapacitated person unable to visit branch for withdrawal of pension and marked instruments were identified by two persons, one of whom was a responsible bank official ie. Late P.N.Chintey, as can be seen very well on copy of payment vouchers marked as annex. 27. 2. Moreover, the news of her husbands death was never communicated to us by his widow, during that time and amounts were withdrawn by the widow, taking guard behind above mentioned rules of the bank as cited in clause 36 of book of instructions of regarding payment of payment of pension to sick and incapacitated persons. More so, verification of these transactions needed no post facto scrutiny on the part of the undersigned as per, INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex.13 Thus, charges levied here, be treated as not proved and not pertaining to the undersigned
26
MY REPLY.
ME-123,124,125. 1. Public Fund Account, no:21-880 was not an ordinary account, it belonged to an unit of Indian Army used for making payments to and from for official purposes. So, it was subjected to sharp scrutiny and periodical audits by defence accounts departments etc .Every month the concerned accountant took statements, had it scrutinized with their Bank reconciliation statements and any anomaly found were corrected promptly,in this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2),about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at .No, objection was put on record about any anomaly in their statements prove the genuineness of these transactions. 2. M-139318 Dated 21.04.2009 &M-155267 Dated 06.05.2009 .Amounts,those mentioned in this transaction involved credits on a/c of reversal of charges levied, since, army a/cs were charge free , which pertained to instruments deposited for collection, within March 2009, but, got collected during April 09. So, as per their accounting system, they took cash payments of all of them clubbed together, first, in sundries. Cash vouchers were duly kept in banks records with recipient's signature thereon,in this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,about voucher management,as per annex.9,be looked at. 3. M196049 Dated 20.03.2009 &M174646 Dated 27.04.2009: All the cited entries, involve charges levied in this account, by the system, although,charges were not to be levied on defence accounts, So, they were reversed.
CHARGE-III-47
Thus, in view of the above, charges leveled here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. ME-127,M-182570,dated 27-10-2009: Here, sometimes, due to paucity of printed withdrawal slips two or three intending with drawers' were provided cash against a single credit cash voucher, mentioning their details thereon, along with signatures on there reverse. Since, passbooks were updated immediately, as envisaged by following observations of internal auditors and nobody raised any objection regarding entries therein, all these withdrawals were genuine.. 1. in this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, about updating of passbook,as per annex.-10,be looked at. 2. Annex .28. Transaction details of M182570 Dated 27.10.2009, cash paid from single voucher. Thus, in view of the above, charge levelled here by the PO,be treated as not proved.
27
MY REPLY.
CHARGE-III-49
ME-128.. The wrong entry of Rs 3000 on 18-12-2009,vide, M-204392, was offset by a contra credit entry of Rs 3000, on 22-12-2009 . In this regard,it has to be kept in mind that, 19th was Saturday and 20th was Sunday .It can very well be viewed in the system.Thus, in view of the same, charge leveled here, be treated as not proved. .In this regard, I would like to cite the following: 1. ME-129,M-49524,dtd.01-02-10 These ,transactions takes place, when,erroneously, draft commissions were charged from defence personnel purchasing drafts in cash and it was reversed in cash, mentioning details in the cash voucher and taking the signature of the recipient there.(in this regard, comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011,about voucher management,as per annex .11,be looked at.) 2. During 22-09-09 to 30-09-2009, undersigned was on approved leave. So, the transaction for crediting cited amounts ot sundries provision account, vide, M No 448307 does not pertain to the undersigned. 3. Regarding this transaction,vide M No 449046,On 29.01.2010 Since,the amounts cited appear to have been debited from Non Customer Account, where reimbursement of proceeds of instruments sent for collection were provided in clubbed form, it necessitated bifurcation, for onward credit/payment to rightful owners, so that they can be paid to rightful beneficiaries.. This is done here and Rs8464, paid to the beneficiary through a credit cash voucher directly, since, it was remaining at sundries provision(transferred during the undersigned was on leave during 22-09 to 30-09-09), taking his signature on it, also to pacify the irate customer .Annex.23-credit cash voucher , M No 449046, be looked at. No, complaint about non payment/credit of amount has been received from any customer. Thus, charge levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. ME-130,ME-131&132,M-244549,dtd.09-03-10,M-405208.dtd.10-03-10&M-370718, dtd.17-03-2010.. The amount was duly returned to the original/rightful depositor .At this branch, most of the customers, depositing and withdrawing cash of such denomination, belong to the category of 1)Teachers of Central School, 2)Defence personnel or3)MES Employees and all MES and defence contractors, who take statements/passbooks regularly. Had this amount not been returned to the rightful depositor, it would have resulted in complaint, which, has not been lodged by any customer, till date. It very well vindicates that, the amount has been duly received by the rightful owner/depositor .It can very well be verified on personal hearing of the version of the depositor whose name was there, on the deposit slip .Moreover, as evident from above named exhibits, all the entries were undertaken with the use of late P.N.Chintey and got verified by the DB password of the undersigned, requiring no post-facto scrutiny. 1. Comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011,about voucher management, as annex .11. 2. INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex.13 Thus, charge levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved against the undersigned.
CHARGE-III-50
28
MY REPLY.
ME-133,M-197959,dtd.07-02-2009. Here, the defence pensioner, Sri R.D.Limbu(SF-01-71246), in consideration of taking the arear money, in cash, from late, P.N.Chintey, with whom, he maintained very cordial relations, handed over a duly signed debit voucher for transferring an equivalent amount to late Chinteys account, since, on that instance, he needed the money badly and the arrear though calculated at that time, was pending for credit in his account. Installment towards his loan account with B/O Ledo, was duly sent vide M-197959 dtd.07-02-2009,for Rs only 3230. In this regard, following documents be looked at. 1.Physical vouchers and system vouchers, pertaining to account no:01-71246 of R.D.Limbu, as annex .30 So, in view of the above, charge levied here, by the PO,be treated as not proved
CHARGE-III-52
ME-134,M-433120,DTD.15-07-2009. Mr. Shyam Bahadur Chetry, deposited Rs19948 in his account no:01-75941, with incorrect account particulars.It couldnot be posted to his account, resulting in a cash surplus and had to be kept in sundries a/c 3171104. ME-135,M-167738,DTD.27-07-2009,the account holder, on being informed came to the branch and on that day, he was sent to the local post office, to get some letters registered, since, the peon was sent elsewhere on some other duty.Mr. Shaym Bahadur Chetry, an employee with a local MES contractor, usually used to offering his services when peon was un available at the branch or preoccupied with other duties. The registration charges ie.Rs52 was duly credited to his account, debiting postage expenses and proper receipt was pinned to the despatch register where those letters were recorded. Then, the amount deposited by him on 15-07-09, vide M-433120,now, lying in sundries, was debited to sundries a/c 3171104 and credited to the a/c of Shyam Bahadur Chetry,01-75941, against the copy of deposit counterfoil and his application, thus taking the combined amount to Rs20000.In this regard, following documents be looked at: 1. System generated & physical vouchers relating to 01-75941, Shyam Bahadur Chetry. Annex.31, 2. Comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009,marked as annex.14(Serial-3), on expenditure management. Thus, in view of the above,charge levied here, by the PO. be treated as not proved.
29
MY REPLY.
a. ME-136,M-310371,dtd.06-01-2010: A bill purchase facility extended to R.P.Roy, SF-0176232 and the system generated ODD no was,242500 E 00001/10(Annex .34),for Rs40000. b. ME-137,M-475956:Mr. Ramprashil Roy,,maintained FD accounts with us, which became matured for payment: FDR NO:00112,dated-28-11-2008,for Rs15000 and FDR NO:623441, Dtd. 22-10-07 respectively, both favouring DIG-AR-HQ-25Sector,a/c of R.P.Roy,falling due for payment and released on 06-11-2009,But due to some anomaly in the system, the maturity payment of one FDR,couldnt be executed and the matter was informed by IT cell at CO, Guwahati and customer was told to wait. 3.But, the IT cell couldnt sort it out and instead told us that, they opted for advice from some other help desk. Meanwhile, the customer got impatient since, he had to take fresh FDs for Rs 95000,in favour of Assam Rifles, Lekhapani, as caution money,against a tender and that day was the last day. So, we had to make the FDs available to him, making the account overdrawn(discharged and released FDR having with us)by Rs33371 and it was not a clean and uncovered accommodation. Then,subsequently, some of his old FD maturity proceeds were released by system and his account came to credit again(annex .35). Moreover, for the overdrawn amount, the system has duly deducted Rs.4973, as interest from the customer's account(annex .35). So, no unauthorized transaction was done here, other than, validly rendering service to a genuine customer and earning revenue for the bank. In this regard, following screenshot of FD a/c of DIG AR HQ AC 25 SECTOR,shows that, the said fixed deposit of R.P.Ray is still lying in the system, becoming overdue since,22-10-2008 and not credited to the party, for which the OD got created. 4. Regarding the recovery of the ODD of Rs 40000, it was a genuine ODD against a valid instrument. While the collection failed to appear and his instrument was dishonored, his account was frozen and the proceeds were duly recovered from him, in exchange of dishonored instrument and now his account is an active and duly operated account again(annex .35) In view of the above, charges levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved.
30
MY REPLY.
CHARGE-III-55
Sundries provision account was credited by late P.N.Chintey as elaborated in comments towards Charge-III.49(SL.2), while the undersigned was on leave. There, 17 debit entries to non-customer account was made. So, to make proceeds of an instrument, sent for collection, appropriated by making a debit to sundries provision(ME-138, M-83881Rs1260), bifurcating lump sum credits to sundries provision, to match the due amount,mentioning the details and signature of the recipient on the cash credit voucher. In this regard,comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011, about voucher management, as annex .11, be looked at. In view of this, charge levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. .All expenditures incurred within vested powers/ excess expenditures got confirmed. All required vouchers were duly prepared with all particulars and duly kept, alonwith all bills and enclosures .Moreover, the undersigned was on approved leave, as per screenshot of leave register as per annex.4, on 23-09-09(charges sl.61,62,63,64,).Following annexure's, proves this: 1. Observations of, IR dtd.03-03-11(annex.37), about maintenance of dak register at SL.3.2&SL3.3,(postage expenses could have been verified from this and all registration and courier receipts duly maintained.). 2. Comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011, about voucher management, as annex.11&comments at IR dated 23-09-10,on voucher management,as per annexure 9. 3. News paper, expenses allowed on the basis of declarations and news paper register was duly maintained and declarations duly filed.
4. Thus, in view of above, charges levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. CHARGE-IV-1,2&3 ME-139,M-528910,dtd.30-12-2009, ME-140,m-544631,dtd.30-12-2009, ME-141, M-552232,dtd.30-12-2009:Here, late P.N.Chintey undertook these transactions, using his general user password and general user password and DB user password of the undersigned in advantageous moments, when the undersigned had to venture out of the branch on business developmental purposes, gaining access to the general user and DB passwords of the undersigned as narrated in Annex .1. on gaining unauthorized access to my passwords. Also, following documents may please be looked at in this regards: 1. Annex.14.Comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, (Serial-3 and covering most part of my tenure), on expenditure management. 2.Annex .36,comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011 on expenditure management. The undersigned, on seeing expenditures getting credited and princial amounts of Fixed deposits and sundry FDs having been debited, got perplexed and noted them down on physical vouchers and intimated the thing to the IT cell and balance sheet cell for guidance, since, amidst all these dilly dallyings, credit balance contd.
31
MY REPLY.
CHARGE-IV-1,2&3 appearing in expenditure not specified else where to the tune of Rs76643, got transferred contd.. to HO, as a sequel to the yearly closing as on 31-03-2010, Then, the manager balance sheet cell,advised about passing MOC vouchers and accordingly, I intimated the thing to the statutory auditors,I visited at Guwahati, during the month of April 2010, to get the accounts of the branch audited, as per telephonic instruction of the CO. Accordingly, a senior officer was sent to the Lekhapani branch, who corrected the anomaly and took letter of satisfaction from one of the aggrieved depositors, ie. Mr. Gokul Bhuyan. But, even after that, the problem occurred. It proves that, some systemic anomaly was responsible for this .In this regard highlighted sections may be looked at though, it takes lot of pain to recover the text from the xerox copy of the letter, as per Annex. 39,letter from Mr. Gokul Bhuyan.The text as per highlighted portion of his letter, vide annex.39 goes like this:Please refer to my petition dated 26-05-10 and satisfaction report issued vide my letter dated 03-06-2010.With utmost surprise I would like to inform you that even after correcting the irregularities existing in my following special FD accts, in presence of a senior officer deputed by your on 03-06-2010, still some financial irregularities exist in my under mentioned special FD accounts, which are enumerated in succeeding paragraphs. The same thing happened in case of Ms Purabi Bhattacharjee, From the copy of the passbook for a/c no:for SF-0451000100087275, where the interest amounts got deposited, as per annex. 40, it has become evident even further. On 17-05-2011, Rs 49126 paid on a/c of FD interest for 22 months. Then again interest payment got disrupted again, then, on 19-01-2012 an amount of Rs14050(inclusive of TDS refunded), towards interest for the period from May11-Oct11, was credited. But, here also anomaly prevails, as correct interest for 6 months@2233pm.would have been Rs 13398, in place of Rs14050(inclusive of TDS refund), as credited. But, after that, in spite of all efforts by the IT cell and CO,regular interest payment could not be commenced/corrected and the FD had to converted into a cumulative one, w.e.f.31 st October 2011 to 31st October 2012., on the ground that, system didnt allow crediting of interest to that FD account with monthly interest option. In this regard,Annex. 40. Copy of passbook of Purabi Bhattacharjee, for SF-0451000100087275(destination account of intt for FD-51-2018),annexure 41, may please be looked at. But, as per annexure 49, till 28-03-2009, system generated correct interest and it was credited in the appropriate destination account. All these proves that, the entire thing happened due to some systemic anomaly, which, though notified by the undersigned and inspite of attempts on the part of CO, could not be rectified, so, ultimately, the scheme had to be converted to Multi Benefit scheme. In this regard,annex .41, Fixed deposit certificate under cumulative option, of Purabi Bhattacharjee, be looked at.Thus, charges levied in these segments, by the PO, be treated as not proved. No charge levied by the presenting officer, in his brief. So, left unanswered. Anyway, the charge sheet cited some transactions and mentioned that,The original entry was created on 25.05.2010 .So, it doesnt pertain to me since, as per, annex. Annex. 42.Transfer to the Silchar Branch and consequent release from Lekhapani Branch. So, it may be treated as not proved.
CHARGE-IV.4
32
MY REPLY.
CHARGE-IV-V&VI ME-143,M-560955,dtd.30-12-2009, ME-144,M-561957,30-12-2009.Here, the CTO,late, P.N.Chintey, did all these transaction, utilizing both the general user and DB user passwords of the undersigned, gaining access to them, in an unauthorized way, as envisaged in annexure no:1. From the fact that, it resulted in creation of credit balances in expenditure accounts and resultant transfer of credit balance of Rs76643, in expenditure not specified elsewhere, as per annexure 24 and detailed report on expenditure accounts getting credited without any rationale behind them, as per, annexure-61, it can very well be accepted as an inadvertent act, without any fraudulent intent. In addition, in this respect, confession and statement about deposit of Rs 400000, by late P.N.Chintey, as per DE-5 and the report on accessing the passwords of the undersigned, as per annexure 1, be looked at. In view of the above, charges levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved.
33
SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-V.1
MY REPLY. Attempt to implicate me by hook and by crook gets manifested here. The entry was undertaken through signature of my successor Mr. P.K.Nandi,long after I was relieved from this branch on 07-05-10.annexure-19 & annexure-Annex. 42, be looke at. Thus, in view of this, charges levelled by PO, here, be treated as not proved. In this regard, since, PO couldnot elaborate,I would like to furnish my detailed reply as per annex .3(6nos.), comprising of allegations in this regard, with their due answers,which shows all the allegations leveled under this heading were utterly baseless with some dating back even before I got promotion to officers cadre . Thus, allegations leveled by the PO, in this regards, be treated as not proved. Reason for delayed submission of MMC and QAE were attributed to precarious physical condition of undersigned and all reasonable efforts at balancing of physical books with CBS, undertaken, under staff constraints and and no attempt was made on my part, to conceal facts, following reports duly vindicate this: 1.My medical reports, as per annexure 2, 2.Annex.43,on IR comments on submission of QAE,as on 03-03-2011. 3.Annex.44,on IR comments on submission of MMC,as on 03-03-2011&23-12-09. .In relation to breakdown of systems and procedures at the branch during my tenure,, following documents be looked at, which are self explanatory and sharply negate the charges levied here: 1. Annex .21(item10.1).Comments at the relevant inspection report dated 23-12-2009, opening of accounts and KYC Norms and morning checking, annex .56. 2. Annex .53, IR comments as on 03-03-11, about cash management (2).. 3. Annex. 9, Comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, &Comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011) annex 11, about voucher management. 4. Annex .50, about comments at IR dtd.03-03-2011& IR dtd.23-12-2010(2), reg. HRMS activities.Annex.14.-comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, Punctuality and Discipline. Thus, charge levied here, by the PO, be treated as not proved. .Because, in connection with my leave spanning 22.09.2009 to 30.09.2009 due leave request submitted and got approved through relevant module of HR MS, in pursuance to circular no: PNB PARIVAR CIRCULAR NO; 07/2007 Dated August 21,2007- annexure57 and Screen shot of my leave register as per HRMS,as per annex .4.. Regarding cited dates, ie.26-06-2009.29-06-09.30-06-09,13-08-09,17-08-09,21-08 to 27-08-09,31-1209,29-06-10,25-02-10&26-02-10, I couldnt realized what the PO tried to establish, as,regarding these dates, I have neither put forward any claim nor I have marked leave on HRMS .Regarding ,29-06-10, PO lost track of the fact that, I was relieved from this branch on 07-05-10(annex.42).So,signing cash book of Lekhapani branch on 29-06-10, was out of reckoning. Iwould also like to put forward the following: 1. CCTV was duly installed and working at the branch premises and attendance of any staff member could very well be ascertained from CCTV recordings. 2. On 22-09 to 30-09-09, I was on leave but, since, no officer employee was given in deputation in my place, nobody put any signature on the Daily cash balance book of the branch, later on, after joining duty,I had to put my signatures after carrying random checking, though at great personal risk. So, charge leveled here, be treated as not proved
CHARGE-V.2
CHARGE-V.3
CHARGE-VI.1
HCHARGE-VI.2
34
CHARGE-VII: On the day of the incident, i.e. 03-05-2010, to be precise, I, along with, the guard of the branch, Sri, Tarun Gogoi, had been at the Tinsukia branch, awaiting for the cash van, since, on the first week of every month, we have to take cash remittance from the currency chest at Tinsukia branch, for disbursing salary of A.T.Coy, an army unit, maintaining their current account with us, bearing account number, 21-941, but, on that day, since, the cash van could not return from Shibsagar, where, it was sent, till 2o clock, we had to postpone taking of cash. But, the CTO worked on that day, alone, as necessitated by custom and usage prevalent in almost all the rural branches, running with single officer .Meanwhile, on that day, the CTO ie. late, P.N.Chintey, accepted a cash deposit from Sri Krishna Prasad Sharma, for onward remittance to the account of Sri Guma Kharel,maintained with the Everest Bank Limited, Nepal. We normally encouraged and welcomed such remittances with open arms at the prospect of earning revenue for the branch, since, for a rural and remotely located branch and mostly, thriving on providing free service to the jawan's of Indian Army, such prospects of earning revenues for the branch were seldom refused. So, the CTO, accepted the deposit, in spite of the fact, that he was alone at the branch, on that day, but in the course of making the posting he in-advertently, inputted the 16 digit account number in the amount ' cell, thus making a transaction as big as this. After verifying the transaction, he could become aware of the folly and so, kept the record of the resultant notional cash shortage in a separate register. But, he didn't divulge the details to me and I initiated the day end activities hurriedly, on returning to the branch and taking recourse to running the TV menu as, on that day, the branch undertook skeleton transactions. The day begin activity was undertaken from Tinsukia branch, which, may please be noted. Next day morning, on detecting the anomaly through morning checking of vouchers, I promptly informed the IT cell at Guwahati, who were kind enough, to telephone IBB Delhi and advised me to reverse it showing it as cash payment, since, the initiating transaction was also in cash, which I promptly did and no revenue loss for the bank, did result. In spite of the inadvertent nature of the mistake and alertness shown by me and the IT cell at Guwahati, to rectify the mistake, all hell broke loose and authorities took a stern view of the entire matter. Then, on settling of the commotion on the next day, the 5th of May 2010 the books were updated and rectifications taken into record. On 4th May, an elaborated statement regarding the entire episode, was duly submitted to the circle office, at Guwahati. by e-mail. I also, would like to strongly refute the allegation that, necessary registers regarding handling of cash, were not maintained and proper safeguards for cash handling were not adopted, instead, would like to state that, all the registers regarding cash handling were maintained at the branch and during my tenure, two internal inspections ' were conducted by ZAO Kolkata and nowhere, any laxity of this sort, was mentioned in the respective inspection reports.In this regards, followin annexure's may be looked at:
1. Annex .53, IR comments as on 03-03-11, about cash management (2), Compliance with RBI&GOI Guidelines, as per annexure 56.2, form no-1,as per annexure,56.7& miscellaneous certificates, as per annex .56.4
Thus, charge levied by the PO, in this regard, may be treated as not proved.
35
Annexure 57, on marking of leave on HRMS.
HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DIVISION HO: 7 BHIKHAIJI CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI 110066
E-mail:pnbparivar@pnb.co.in TO ALL HO DIVNs/ ZO/RO/ZAO PNB PARIVAR CIRCULAR LETTER NO. : August 21, 2007 07/2007
PNB PARIVAR (HRMS) ATTENDANCE STATUS

Provision for marking attendance has been made In PNB PARIVAR. All offices including branches having CBS connectivity are required to mark attendance and save the data in the system within 30 minutes from the schedule working hours of the branch/office. While marking the
attendance the Incumbent In charge of the branch will be able to mark attendance of the Concurrent Auditor as well. The provision has also
been made for marking attendance for employees on shift duty apart from normal duty hours. Complete navigation for marking attendance is enclosed for necessary action at yours. Please note that all offices are required to mark attendance in PNB PARIVAR with immediate effect. All controlling offices should monitor attendance in the system on day to day basis. All concerned are advised to note for meticulous compliance. CHIEF MANAGER
ENCLOSURES SUBMITTED ALONGWITH REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO

PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012
SL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
PARTICULARS OF DOCUMENTS ENCLOSED. Annex.1.Report on gaining unauthorized access to my passwords. Annex.2 Medical Certificates, prescriptions and diagnostic reports (12). Annex. 3. Irregularities cited in Bill Purchased Accounts(6). Screen shot of my leave register as per HRMS,as per annex.4. Annex. 5,report on scrutiny of individual items of pension scrolls, and scrutiny by the link branch,as per annex .5. Annex.6.Comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, regarding of proper updating of IT inventory. Annex.7, Comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, on physical checking of SFF items, with SFF register. Annex.8,details of the LCD monitor, lying at the branch stores as given in a handwritten chit written by PO Annex. 9, Comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, about voucher management. Annex.10, comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009(B.3-1&2), about updating of passbook. Comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011about voucher management. Annex. Comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011, about updating of passbook/statement & general branch functioning and discipline. Annex. 13. INSPECTION AND AUDIT DIVISION CIRCULAR NO. 15 / 2006,marked as annex.13 Annex.14.Comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, (Serial-3), on expenditure management, Punctuality and Discipline. Annex. 15. Finding at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009, regarding long pending life certificate of Surati Devi. . Annex. Copy of voucher with comments about enclosures for bills, charge III-7. GIVEN ALONGWITH ANNEX.59 Annex.17,Copy of leave extension letter to CO. Annex.18, Physical vouchers prepared by late P.N.Chintey showing tr. details of M-205996 dated 12-03-10 and associated docs. Annex.19 regarding Charge V,1.. Annex.(List of non-KYC compliant a/cs).Comments at the relevant inspection report dated 23-12-2009. Annex .21(item10.1).Comments at the relevant inspection report dated 23-12-2009, opening of accounts and KYC Norms and morning checking. Annex.22.Xerox copy of demand draft of Champakali Bhattacharjee. Annex.23. Signed physical voucher of amount paid from Sundries provision, charge-III,49 Annex.24. Revenue account as on 31-03-2010. Annex.25, Cash voucher of Md Shahid, a/c no:01-7515 Annex.26, SWOT Analysis in IR Dated 23-12-2009. Annex.27.Complaint letter and payment vouchers (3)of a/c of Nikunja Debnath. Annex.28 Transaction details of M182570 Dated 27.10.2009, cash paid from single voucher. Annex.29.Cash deposit slips of Mr. Rakesh Kumar, 402, FD. Ambulance. Annex.30, System Vouchers pertaining to Ram Dhaj Limbu and physical vouchers(6). Annex. 31, System and Physical Vouchers pertaining to Shyam Bahadur Chetry(9). Annex.28Credit cash voucher , M No 449046, Charge-III.49.CONTAINED ALONGWITH ANNEX.23

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56
DELETED All system generated vouchers of R.P.Roy,SF-01-76232(5). Account Statement of R.P.Roy,SF-01-76232. Comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011 on expenditure management, punctuality and rotation of duties. Comments at relevant IR dated 03-03-2011 on dak register maintenance SL. 3.1,3.2&SL3.3. Comments at relevant IR dated 23-12-2009 on dak register maintenance SL.3.2&SL3.3. Annex. 39.Letter from Mr. Gokul Bhuyan.
Deleted
Y for printing Y for printing Y for printing
Annex. 40. Copy of passbook of Purabi Bhattacharjee, for SF0451000100087275(destination account of intt for FD-51-2018).
Annex.41, Fixed deposit certificate under cumulative option, of Purabi Bhattacharjee. Annex. 42.Transfer to the Silchar Branch and consequent release from Lekhapani Branch. Annex.43,on IR comments on submission of QAE,as on 03-03-2011. Annex.44,on IR comments on submission of MMC,as on 23-12-2010&03-03-2011. Attendance register and cash book printout about using P.K.Nandis passwords during his leave. Provided alongwith annex.45 Deleted Annex.48, about IR comments on AOFs not available at the branch, as on 03-03-2011. Annex.49, system vouchers about crediting of FD intt. To the account of Purabi Bhattacharjee and and Sarodevi. Annex.50, about comments at IR dtd.03-03-2011& IR dtd.23-12-2010(2), reg. HRMS activities. Annex.51, about undeleting of passwords of H.S.Bhattacharjee, on Joining Silchar branch. Deleted Annex.53, IR comments as on 03-03-11, about cash management (2). Deleted Deleted Annex.56, IR comments as on 23-12-2010&03-03-11, about(5pages): 1. KYC And AML 2. Compliance with RBI&GOI Guidelines, 3. No manual entries in system generated pass books, 4. Misc. Certificates, 5. General Comments, 6. Form 1 7. Unauthorized Business. Annex.57, Circular on marking of leave on HRMS. GOI Guidelines on payment of pension to sick and incapacitated pensioners. Physical voucher of transaction no: M 199532 Dated 25.08.2009 Copy of demand draft voucher favoring Sena Welfare Organization, New Delhi. Details about erroneous credits of expenditures.
57 58 59 60 61 1 2
LIST OF DEFENSE EXHIBITS (DA s).

SFF Statement. Not Enclosed

3 4 5 6 7 8
Attendance registers for Dec08,Jan,Feb09. Not enclosed. DE-5, confession statement and declaration about deposit of Rs400000, by late. P.N.Chintey. Death Certificate of P.N.Chintey. Not enclosed Signature slip of Dipak Baruah.

Replies To The Brief of The POwith Annexures and DEs

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Replies To The Brief of The POwith Annexures and DEs

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

Suspense a/c 57113

Sundry a/c 6455 3171104

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-I-5 Continued.

Reference a)ME-25,M436838 Dtd.01-06-09 b)ME-26,M160673, Dtd.05-08-09 c)ME-27,M3042,Dtd.0812-09

SF 0129000 41290, Madan kalita 27241 Suspense a/c 5711310 56241

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

c)ME-27, Contd. Contd. From page no:4 M3042, Dtd.08-12-09

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

Nonc)M416979,dtd. Customer A/C 03-12-09

Suspense a/c 50288 5711313

d)M-414886 Non40500 Customer A/C3171160 So, in view of above entries,

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO MY REPLY. OF CHARGES.

CHARGE :II-3 continued.

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

b)ME36 ,M431802,dtd. 03-11-09

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-14b)

b)MESundry a/c 10032 72,M3171104 140252,dtd .24-10-09

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-16

DEPUTY MANAGER,BO: SILCHAR, PREVIOUSLY, INCUMBENT IN CHARGE AT BO: LEKHAPANI.

ME-73&ME-74: The transaction vide M 189875 Dated 28.10.2009 Dated 28.10.2009,&M

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-21

Sundries b)ME3171104 82,M12287,0412-09

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-22 contd.

Reference a)ME-83M335327 Dtd.01-12-09

Dr. Particulars Amount 46267 01-36021

Cr. Remarks. Amount 40203 Here, in reconciliation of 6064

Sundry Deposit 3171104

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-25

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

Reference Particulars ME-92, Sundries a/c M290001, 3171104 dtd. 28-04-10

Staff Canteen a/c 0142493

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-30

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-31

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-34

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-37

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-40

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-44

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-46

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012

SERIAL NO OF CHARGES. CHARGE-III-48

REPLIES TO THE BRIEF OF PO PERTAINING TO CHARGE SHEET DATED 30-05-2012