2018 Supreme(Pat) 1747

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SHIVAJI PANDEY, J.
C.W.J.C. No. 8618 of 2017
(17.12.2018)
Santosh Kumar Paswan – Petitioner
vs.
State Bank of India & Ors. – Respondents

Headnote:

Service Law – Dismissal – From post of Branch Manager of Bank for involvement in criminal case – Power of judicial review is to ensure that individual has received fair treatment and not to ensure that conclusion which authority reaches is necessarily correct in eye of court – If enquiry has been conducted, Court is to see whether enquiry has been held by a competent officer or whether rule of principle of natural justice has been complied with, whether findings of conclusion are based on some evidence, authority entrusted with power to hold enquiry has jurisdiction and power in the authority to arrive to a finding of fact or conclusion that finding was based on some evidence – Neither technical rules of Evidence Act nor of proof of fact or evidence as defined therein, apply to disciplinary proceeding – Enquiry proceeding is based on principle of preponderance of probability – When authority accepts that evidence and conclusion receives support therefrom, disciplinary authority is entitled to hold that delinquent officer is guilty of charge – Court while exercises power of judicial review, it does not act as appellate authority to reappreciate evidence and to arrive at its own independent findings on evidence. (Para 9)

Service Law – Departmental Proceeding – Fair procedure is to be adopted, delinquent employee should be given a chance to defend his case and charge to be proved on the basis of some supporting evidence but, area and scope of interference on finding recorded by Enquiry Officer will be in consideration to fact that as to whether fair and reasonable opportunity was given during enquiry, findings are based on some evidence, irrelevant consideration has not been taken by Enquiry Officer and relevant facts have not been left out and findings are not perverse – In the event that fair standard of natural justice has been followed, next step would be to examine procedural fairness in conducting enquiry proceeding, in event it is found deviation, is to be examined on the test in any manner caused prejudice to delinquent employee, in the event court arrives to a finding that infraction of certain procedure caused prejudice, in such an event, Court would interfere and would give direction to proceed further from that stage as per procedure prescribed. (Para 19)

Service Law – Dismissal – From post of Branch Manager of Bank for involvement in criminal case – If the person is holding position of trust where honesty and integrity are inbuilt requirements of functioning, it would not be proper to deal with the matter leniently – Misconduct in such cases has to be dealt with iron hands – Where person deals with public money or is engaged in financial transactions or acts in a fiduciary capacity, highest degree of integrity and trustworthiness is a must and unexceptionable – Every officer/employee of Bank is required to take all possible steps to protect interests of Bank and to discharge his duties with utmost integrity, honesty, devotion and diligence and to do nothing which is unbecoming of a Bank officer – Writ application dismissed. (Paras 20 and 21)

Bankers’ Books Evidence Act, 1891 – Sections 2A and 4 – For proving document, certificate by a person in charge of computer system containing a brief description of computer system has to be given and all certified copy of any entry in bankers’ book shall in all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence of existence of such entry and shall be submitted as an evidence of matter, transactions and accounts therein recorded in every case where and to the same extent as original entry itself is now by law admissible as a piece of evidence – If Bank produces a document with certification from a competent authority, it will be treated to be an piece of evidence and rightly documents were marked as exhibit – It is not necessary that in every situation oral evidence is necessary for proving the same – Presumption of entries made in record will be treated to be proper piece of evidence and will have evidentiary value attached with presumption of correctness of entries – In the same manner, documents produced by defence were also marked as exhibit, inasmuch as, he had never challenged or raised objection even in any of explanation mode, manner and method adopted for holding departmental enquiry in making documents as exhibits. (Paras 27 and 28)