The drawing up of a charge sheet is a condition precedent for the initiation of disciplinary proceedings, and in the absence of statutory rules, resorting to a preliminary inquiry alone is not enough to initiate a departmental proceeding.

B.R. Gavai, J.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the charge-sheet dated 21.04.2016 thereby informing the petitioner about the charges levelled against him.

3. The facts are not in dispute. The petitioner was in employment of the respondents. The petitioner was issued with a show cause notice on 8.3.2016. The petitioner replied to the same on 22.3.2016. However, a communication was addressed to the petitioner on 31.03.2016 informing him that since he would stand retired on 31.03.2016, the provisions of sub-clauses (3) and (4) of Clause 45 of Vidarbha Konkan Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Regulations") are invoked against him. Subsequently a charge-sheet came to be issued to the petitioner on 21.04.2016. It could thus be clearly seen that though the show cause was issued to the petitioner prior to the date on which he was superannuated i.e. on 31.03.2016, a charge-sheet was issued to him only on 21.04.2016.

4. Mr. Anand Parchure, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that since the petitioner stood retired on 31.03.2016 and since the charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner on 21.04.2016, in view of sub-clauses (3) and (4) of Clause 45 of the said Regulations the departmental proceedings are not permissible in law.

5. It is the contention of the respondent-Bank that since the show cause notice was issued to the petitioner prior to the date on which he was superannuated and since on the date on which he was superannuated the provisions of sub-clause (3) of Clause 45 of the said Regulations were already invoked, the departmental proceedings are very much permissible in law.

6. We find that the issue is no more res integra. In the case of UCO Bank and another v. Rajinder Lal Capoor reported in AIR 2007 Supreme Court 2129 (1), Their Lordships of the Apex Court had an occasion to consider a clause which is analogous to Clause 45 (3) of Vidarbha Konkan Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2013.

7. It will be relevant to refer to the clause which fell for consideration before Their Lordships i.e. Regulation 20 (3)(iii) of UCO Bank Officer Employees' Service Regulations, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as "UCO Bank Regulations") which reads thus:-

"The Officer against whom disciplinary proceedings have been initiated will cease to be in service on the date of superannuation but the disciplinary proceeding will continue as if he was in service until the proceedings are concluded and final order is passed in respect thereof. The concerned officer will not receive any pay and/or allowance after the date of superannuation. He will also not be entitled for the payment of retirement benefits till the proceedings are completed and final order is passed thereon except his own contributions to CPF."

It will also be relevant to refer to the provision which is sought to be made applicable to the present petitioner by the respondent Bank. The relevant provision of the said Regulations which could be found at Annexure-D i.e. communication addressed by the respondent-Bank to the petitioner reads thus:-

"Section 45(3):- The officer or employee against whom disciplinary proceeding has been initiated shall cease to be in service on the date of superannuation but the disciplinary proceedings shall continue as if he was in service until the proceedings are concluded and final order passed in respect thereof."

8. It could thus be seen that both the provisions are almost analogous. In both the provisions, it is stated that an employee against whom the disciplinary proceedings have been initiated, will cease to be in service on the date of superannuation but the disciplinary proceeding shall continue as if he was in service until the proceedings are concluded and final order is passed in respect thereof.

9. The s