Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH, J.
CWJC No. 25672 of 2013
(1.10.2021)
Narendra Kumar Sinha ... Petitioner
vs.
Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank ... Respondents
Service Law – Removal – From Banking service by way of punishment – There has been complete non-application of mind by Disciplinary Authority – There is no discussion at all as to why explanation submitted by petitioner in response to report of Inquiry Officer was not acceptable to Disciplinary Authority – Requirement of recording of reasons by Disciplinary Authority as to why employee's response to report of Inquiring Authority was not acceptable to him, is essential for compliance of principle of natural justice – Impugned order passed by Disciplinary Authority deserves to be set aside on this score alone – Reasoned order of Appellate Authority cannot validate patent illegality in order of Disciplinary Authority. (Paras 27 and 28)
Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010 – Clauses 16, 17, 18 and 19 – Siwan Khestriya Regional Rural Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2001 – Clauses 16, 17 and 19 – Removal from Banking service by way of punishment – All charges, in absence of definite particulars mentioned therein, even briefly, suffer from vice of vagueness – Court exercising power of judicial review under Article 226 of Constitution of India should normally not re-appreciate evidence already appreciated by authorities exercising quasi judicial function – However, if a challenge is posed to such finding on the ground that same is without evidence or contrary to evidence / materials on record or same has been arrived at by taking into account irrelevant materials leaving out relevant once, Court, exercising power of judicial review, is required to entertain such challenge on the basis of available materials/pleadings – No cogent evidence was adduced to establish that petitioner habitually remained absent from Branch on any false pretext – There is no oral or documentary evidence showing absence of ledgers/registers from Bank or petitioner carrying those documents from Bank to his residence or bringing them back from his residence – Vague allegation that petitioner used to make such misrepresentation cannot be treated to be a piece of evidence – Decision of Disciplinary Authority to impose punishment is unsustainable – Order of Appellate Authority also deserves to be set aside for same reasons – Impugned orders set aside – Petitioner shall required to be reinstated in service with full back-wages and/or consequential benefits as if no order of dismissal was ever passed against him – Payment of back wages shall be subject to petitioner furnishing statement on affidavit to the effect that during the period he remained out of service by operation of impugned order of removal from service, he was not gainfully employed elsewhere. (Paras 35 to 41 and 47)
Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.—The matter has been taken up for hearing on-line because of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 16.04.2011 (Annexure-12) passed by the Chairman-cumPatna Disciplinary Authority, Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, Muzaffarpur, whereby he has been removed from the service of the Bank by way of punishment. His appeal has been dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide an order dated 06.07.2013, which is also under challenge. The petitioner was posted as an officer at the relevant point of time at Jamo Bazar Branch of Siwan Kshetriya Gramin Bank. The said Siwan Khestriya Gramin Bank has since merged with the respondent, Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, Muzaffarpur.
3. Before coming to the merits of the case, a brief outline of the history of the case as to how this matter has placed before this Bench on remand by the Supreme Court need to be taken note of, at the outset. The petitioner was proceeded departmentally for four charges of misconduct. The Fourth charge was found ‘not proved’ in the departmental enquiry as reported by the Inquiry Officer in his report. He, however, found three other charges to have been ‘proved’ against the petitioner. Based on the findings recorded by the Inquiry Officer, the Disciplinary Authority imposed punishment of removal from the service by the impugned order dated 16.04.2011. The fourth charge has, thus, lost its significance for the purpose of present adjudication. The other three charges levelled against the petitioner were as under:—
“(Charge No. (1):—Sri Narendra Kumar Sinha, Officer misled Branch Manager and other officers/employees posted at Jamo Market Branch after proving them false information that he has been permitted by the undersigned to visit Head Office constantly for review of the progress of matching of balance, whereas Sri Sinha has met the undersigned in this regard at Head Office only one or two times. In this way, you have remained absent from the Branch and misled your higher officials by supplying false information. A written letter to this effect has been given by officers/ employees posted at Jamo Market Branch.
This act of Sri Sinha is violation of Section “16” of Siwan Regional Rural Bank officer/employees Service Regulation, 2001 and punishable offence under Section “36”.
Charge No. (2).—In course of matching the balance of domestic savings Accounts in Jamo Market Branch, Sri Sinha has been taking away/bringing back savings Accounts, ledger, deposit register, withdrawal register, supplementary register and vouchers and balance book relating to that to/ from his residence at Siwan. The information to this effect has been submitted to the undersigned by officer/ employee posted at the Branch, Sri Harinath Ram, Sri Ram Sagar Sharma, Sri Kumar Sawalia Prasad Giri, Sri Fuldeo Singh and Sri Anil Kumar Ambastha through a letter signed by them.
This act of Sri Sinha is gross violation of Sections “17” and “18” of Siwan Regional Rural Bank officer/employee Service Regulation, 2001 and punishable offence under Section “38”.
Charge No. (3).—This wrong information was being given by Sri Sinha to officers/ employees posted in the Branch that the undersigned has assured them that they would be posted at their desired place, whenever Sri Sinha wants, which is absolutely far from truth.
In this way Sri Sinha has resorted to falsehood in order to browbeat officer/employees posted at Jamo Market Branch and the information to this effect has been given by the employees posted in the Branch. This act of Sri Sinha is violation of Section “16” of Siwan Regional Rural Bank Officer/Employees Service Regulation, 2001 and punishable offence under Section “38”.
4. This writ petition was earlier partly allowed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court by an order dated 26.09.2014. While allowing this writ application, this Court specifically held that there was no legal evidence to justify the finding apropos charge no.2. In respect of other two charges, i
The disciplinary authority's decision to remove the employee for financial misconduct was upheld, as the inquiry followed due process and the employee admitted to significant charges.
The court emphasized the limited scope of judicial review in disciplinary proceedings, highlighting the discretionary power of the disciplinary authority to impose appropriate punishment and the impo....
Bank officials accused of serious financial misconduct are expected to discharge their duties with utmost integrity and honesty, and the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority cannot be sub....
The importance of following prescribed procedures and principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedings.
The court established that in disciplinary proceedings, the principles of natural justice must be followed, but the court's role is limited to ensuring procedural fairness rather than re-evaluating t....
The principles of natural justice require that a person facing disciplinary action be given an opportunity to defend themselves, including the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and submit a repl....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
