SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.K. MAHESHWARI, VIJAY BISHNOI, JJ.
The General Manager (P) Canara Bank – Appellant
Versus
Ganganarasimhaiah – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 11461 of 2025 (Arising Out Of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 20343 of 2022)
Decided On : 09-09-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of respondent's service history and allegations. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. tribunal's findings on the fairness of the inquiry. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. appellant's arguments regarding procedural errors in the tribunal. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. respondent's defense against claims of misconduct. (Para 21 , 22) |
| 5. court's analysis of misconduct and evidence presented. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 6. judicial standards for evaluating disciplinary proceedings. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 7. court’s final decision and rationale on the disciplinary action. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
VIJAY BISHNOI, J.
Leave granted.
2. This appeal has been preferred by the Appellant challenging the Judgment dated 12.08.2022 passed in Writ Petition No. 1857 of 2020 (L-RES) by the High Court of Karnataka. The Division Bench of the High Court, thereby affirmed the Award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Labour Court (hereinafter referred to as “Tribunal”) in C.R. No. 138/2007 dated 25.09.2019, by setting aside the punishment of compulsory retirement imposed upon the Respondent and directed his reinstatement into the original post with continuity of service without back wages.
BRIEF FACTS
3. The facts, in brief, are that the Respondent joined the service of the Appellant-Bank as a daily wage Sub-Staff on 17.10.1990. Subsequently, his service was confirmed as Duftery-cum-Cash Peon as Sub-Staff Leader on 18.07.1992. The Respondent was thereafter posted at V.G. Doddi branch from 11.11.1997 till 01.08.2004. Thereafter, he was posted at Bommasandra branch on 02.08.2004.
4. The then manager, Shri H.N. Ramesh of V.G. Doddi branch submitted an investigation report on 06.08.2004 alleging serious irregularities at the branch office, V.G. Doddi branch when the Respondent and other staff members were posted there.
5. A preliminary enquiry was conducted into the said irregularities and the Respondent, in the said enquiry, on 24.07.2004 admitted that certain loans were advanced to his wife which were availed by coercing the manager and without obtaining any sanction from the Controlling Officer. The Respondent also accepted that he made unauthorized entries in the bank accounts of one Shri Ramakrishnaiah and his father, Shri Kambaiah, thereby tampering with the official records.
6. The Respondent was then put under suspension on 19.08.2004 because of contemplation to initiate the disciplinary proceeding, and thereafter a chargesheet dated 28.04.2005 was issued to the Respondent in respect of the charges. The chargesheet is reproduced herein below for easy reference:-
You were working at our V.G. Doddi branch from 11.11.1997 to 01.00.2004 prior to your joining Bommasandra Branch on 02.08.2004 and you were placed under suspension on 19.08.2004.
Serious discrepancies in the Advances Portfolio of our V.G. Doddi branch was observed and an investigation conducted into the matter has brought to fore the following irregularities/ fraudulent acts on your part;
FGC 1/2000 for Rs. 25000/- for Rs. 25,000/- to Shri Kambaiah on 03.04.2000;
On 03.04.2000 FGC 1/2000 for Rs. 25,000 has been granted to Shri. Kambaiah S/o Shri Rangaiah, Nayakanapalya, Magadi Taluk who is your father.
On 01.03.2000, Shri R. R. Hoover , the then Manager had allowed a TOD for Rs. 10000/- in the SB Account No. 519 of Shri. Kambaiah. Again on 24.03.2000, you had requested for a further ftnance of Rs. 25,000/- in your father's account informing the Mnagaer that your father would be visiting the branch for executing the loan papers. At your behest Shri. R. R. Hoover had prepared the debit and credit slips far by debiting FGC account and crediting SB account No. 519 of Shri. Kambaiah. The slips for granting FGC loan was prepared without even preparing the loan papers as Shri. Kambaiah had not personally visited the branch for executing loan papers.
You have posted the credit slips in SB 519 of Shri. Kambaiah and withdrawn Rs. 15000/- from his SB accou
Standard Chartered Bank vs. R.C. Srivastava, reported in (2021) 19 SCC 281 [Paras 20
State of Rajasthan and Others vs. Heem Singh
The court held that disciplinary authority's punishment must be proportionate to the misconduct, and failure to adhere to natural justice principles can warrant judicial intervention.
The Tribunal's modification of punishment from dismissal to compulsory retirement was justified based on proportionality and the workman's long service, emphasizing the importance of fair inquiry pro....
Judicial review of disciplinary proceedings is limited to assessing procedural fairness; evidence must meet the preponderance of probabilities standard in administrative contexts, not beyond a reason....
The standard of proof in disciplinary proceedings is based on preponderance of probabilities, and the court does not reappraise evidence unless there is a violation of natural justice.
Grant of reinstatement - Court will not ordinarily interfere in the punishment imposed in the disciplinary proceedings to substitute its own conclusion on penalty except where the punishment imposed ....
Judicial review in departmental proceedings is limited to ensuring procedural fairness, not evaluating the merits of evidence. The disciplinary authority's conclusions, supported by some evidence, ar....
Judicial review of disciplinary actions is limited; courts cannot reappraise evidence or substitute their judgment unless findings are arbitrary or unsupported by evidence.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.