IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that disciplinary actions must be based on evidence, and the absence of such evidence can lead to judicial intervention.

JUDGMENT :

Debangsu Basak, J.

1. Two appeals have been heard analogously as they emanate out of the same impugned judgement and order.

2. The appeal of the employer has been numbered as APO 66 of 2022 while that of the employee has been numbered as APOT 134 of 2022.

3. Learned advocate appearing for the employer has submitted that, the employee was issued a chargesheet dated January 27, 2017 to which the employee had given a reply dated February 14, 2017. Employee had challenged the disciplinary proceeding in a writ petition being WP 21662 (W) of 2016 which was disposed of by an order dated August 8, 2017 by directing the employer to conclude the departmental proceedings upon compliance with the principles of natural justice.

4. Learned advocate appearing for the employer has submitted that the enquiry officer submitted a report dated November 15, 2017 and held all charges levelled against the employee in the chargesheet dated January 27, 2017 were proved. Employee had submitted written submissions with regard to the enquiry report. The disciplinary authority had passed an order dated December 30, 2017 imposing the penalty of dismissal from service. Employee had preferred an appeal therefrom. Employee had filed a writ petition being WP 11130 of 2018 which was disposed of on July 11, 2018 by directing the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal within two weeks from the date of communication of the order. Appellate authority had passed an order dated August 16, 2018 confirming the order of dismissal from service.

5. Relying upon 2003 (3) SCC 583 (Lalit Popli vs. Canara Bank and Others) learned advocate appearing for the employer has contended that there was no violation of the principles of natural justice in the enquiry proceeding. Subsequent discharge in the criminal proceedings has no relevance in the facts and circumstances of the present case. He has also relied upon All India Reporter 1992 SC 1981 (Nelson Motis vs. Union of India and Another) with regard to the effect of discharge in a criminal proceeding. He has contended that, the employee did not act with devotion diligence and integrity. He has relied upon 1998 (4) SCC 310 (Union Bank of India vs. Vishwa Mohan) in support of such contention.

6. Relying upon 2003 (4) SCC 364 (Chairman and Managing Director, United Commercial Bank and Others versus P.C. Kakkar) learned advocate appearing for the employer has contended that, since there was no error in the ecision-making process, the decision taken by the employer should not be interfered with.

7. With regard to the scope of a writ of certiorari, learned advocate appearing for the employer has relied upon All India Reporter 1964 SC 477 (Syed Yakoob vs. K. S. Radhakrishnan and Others). On the aspect of exercise of powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, learned advocate appearing for the employer has relied upon 2015 (2) SCC 610 (Union of India and Others vs. P. Gunasekaran). On the contention that, the quantum of punishment is within the domain of the employer, learned advocate appearing for the employer has relied upon 1996 (3) SCC 364 (State Bank of Patiala and Others versus S.K. Sharma).

8. Learned advocate appearing for the employer has relied upon All India Reporter 1982 SC 673 (J. D. Jain vs. The Management of State Bank of India) for the contention that, strict rules of Indian Evidence Act do not apply in a domestic enquiry proceeding. He has also relied upon All India Reporter 1977 SC 1512 (State of Haryana vs. Rattan Singh).

9. Learned advocate appearing for the employee has referred to the list of dates. He has contended that the employee was working as Senior Manager (Information Technology) (IT) of the employer and was deputed to a regional rural bank of which the employer was a sponsor on August 10, 2015. Employee had made a complaint under the Whistleblower Policy of the employer bringing to the notice of the Vigilance Authorities about bank loan fraud and looting of loan in the credit op