A person cannot be prosecuted or punished for the same offence more than once.

JUDGMENT :

(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.) :

1. The present writ application has been filed, inter alia, challenging the charge-sheet dated 31st May, 2011/1st June of 2011, the Enquiry Officer’s report dated 20th March, 2012, the final order of the Disciplinary Authority dated 3rd August, 2012 and the order passed by the Appellate Authority dated 18th September, 2012.

2. The petitioner had been employed as Special Assistant, Issue Department (Cash), Reserve Bank of India, Kolkata vide employment no. 01536, and had taken a loan of Rs.1,30,000/-from the Bally Co-operative Bank Ltd., out of which a sum of Rs.80,000/-had been repaid. On 25th June, 2004, the petitioner claims to have requested the Manager of the Bally Co-operative Bank to provide him with the statement of accounts, in respect of the Loan Account, unfortunately such statement was not supplied to the petitioner.

3. While in service on 9th October, 2007, a charge-sheet was issued on the petitioner which is at page 48 of the writ application, inter alia, on the ground of the petitioner having committed breach of Regulation 47(1) of the Reserve Bank of India (Staff) Regulations, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Regulations”), by forging documents, purportedly issued by the Bank as morefully stated in paragraph 2 of the said charge-sheet. In the domestic enquiry that followed, by a final order dated 16th May, 2008, he was inflicted a punishment and was ordered that his substantive pay be reduced by four stages, for four years with effect from the communication of the said order with the further direction that the same shall have the effect of postponing the date of future increment and withholding his increments in the intervening period.

4. Challenging the aforesaid final order, the petitioner had preferred an appeal whereupon the Appellate Authority upon taking into consideration the case as made out by the petitioner, modified the final order dated 16th May, 2008 thereby directing reduction of substantive pay by three (3) stages, for a period of three (3) years from the date of final order, with a further direction that the reduction shall have the effect of withholding his increments, in the intervening period and shall have the effect of postponing his future increments. It is, however, the contention of the petitioner that since, all transactions in the Bally Co-operative Bank had been frozen pursuant to direction issued by the Reserve Bank of India, the petitioner could not service the aforesaid loan account and repay the outstanding.

5. Subsequently, on 17th August, 2009, a further charge-sheet was issued on the petitioner which is at page 59 of the writ application wherefrom it would transpire that the petitioner was charged of having committed breach of Regulation 32 of the said Regulations by failing to comply with Bank’s directions as detailed in paragraph 2 of the said charge-sheet. The said charge-sheet ultimately culminated in a final order dated 18th December, 2009, whereby the Disciplinary Authority awarded a punishment as provided in Regulation 47(1)(a) of the said Regulations by reprimanding him.

6. Since then, another charge-sheet dated 31st May, 2011, followed (hereinafter referred to as the “third charge-sheet”) which is at page 63 of the writ application. By the aforesaid charge-sheet the petitioner was charged of having committed acts of gross misconduct and indiscipline, by acting in a manner detrimental to the interest of the Bank, in terms of Regulation 45 of the said Regulations, by failing to liquidate his outside debts within a reasonable period and by failing to submit half yearly statement of liability within time and also by not declaring certain part of debt in the half yearly statement of liability submitted by him.

7. The petitioner had responded to the said charge-sheet by communication in writing dated 15th June, 2011 and, inter alia, claimed that on April 24, 2002, he had taken a loan of Rs.1,30,000/-from Bally Co-operative Bank