Back
2024 Supreme(Gau) 29
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Arun Dev Choudhury, J.
Santi Ram Nath, S/o Late Haliram Nath – Petitioner
Versus
The Assam Co-Operative Apex Bank Ltd. and Ors. – Respondents
WP(C)/4823/2012
Decided On : 12-02-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr.R M Das, Mr. S Kataki, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. JK Goswami, Standing counsel, Mr.P N Goswami
The judgment underscores the significance of adhering to principles of natural justice and the requirement for evidence to support charges in departmental proceedings.
Headnote:
Natural Justice - Departmental Enquiry - Bank Staff Rules, 1980 - Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India - Rule 43(a)(i), 46(b) - [SUMMARY]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the imposition of a penalty after a departmental enquiry, alleging violation of principles of natural justice and fair play. The petitioner was accused of physically assaulting a General Manager, leading to suspension and subsequent departmental proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the departmental proceeding was conducted in violation of natural justice, with no evidence to support the charge of physical assault. The court set aside the punishment and directed the petitioner to be given all consequential benefits.
Issues: Violation of natural justice, lack of evidence to support the charge, fairness of the departmental proceeding
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of upholding natural justice in departmental proceedings and highlighted the need for evidence to support charges. It also noted that the disciplinary authority must follow due procedure and ensure fairness in the proceedings.
Final Decision: The punishment inflicted upon the petitioner was set aside, and the petitioner was granted all consequential benefits. The court decided not to allow the respondent bank to initiate de-novo proceedings due to the prolonged nature of the case and the retirement of the petitioner and the complainant.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. S Kataki, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. JK Goswami, learned standing counsel for the Assam Co-operative Bank Limited.
2. The writ petition has been filed assailing an order dated 13.06.2012, whereby a penalty of stoppage of two years annual increment with cumulative effect was imposed upon the petitioner with a further punishment to treat the period of suspension of the petitioner without duty, thereby restricting the pay and allowances of the said period to the subsistence allowance already drawn by the petitioner. Such punishment was imposed upon the petitioner after a departmental enquiry.
3. The basic ground for challenge of such action on the part of the employer of the petitioner amongst others, are the violation of principles of natural justice and fair play inasmuch as it is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was not allowed to cross-examine the management witnesses and that it is a case of no evidence and therefore the decision is perverse.
4. The brief facts leading to the filing of this writ petition can be summarized as follows:
I. The petitioner while was rendering his service as Subordinate Engineer, one Manish Choudhury, General Manager, Accounts and Audit Branch of the Bank lodged a complaint against the petitioner on 14.03.2011 alleging that while some of the employees of printing and stationary section of the Account and Audit department were engaged in official work on 13.03.2011, there were some altercation between the complainant and the petitioner and the petitioner physically assaulted the complainant Sri Manish Choudhury.
II. On the basis of such a complaint and after recording statements of one Sri Kanak Lal Thakuria and Md. Mozammil Hoque, both employees of accounts and audit department, who were engaged in official work on 13.03.2011 and also after recording statement of one Sri Akan Barman, Guard of the Bank, the petitioner was placed under suspension under Rule 43(a)(i) of the Staff Rules of the Bank pending drawal of departmental proceeding.
III. Thereafter, a departmental proceeding was initiated by issuing a show cause under Rule 46 (b) of the Bank Staff Rules, 1980 by a communication dated 23.03.2011, asking the petitioner why penalty prescribed under Rule 46(a) thereof should not be inflicted upon the petitioner for committing gross insubordination and acting in a manner detrimental to the interest of the bank.
IV. An article of charge was also framed. Along with the show cause, a statement of allegation was also given to the petitioner. The article of charge is quoted hereinbelow:
“Article of Charge No. 1: That as detailed in the Statement of Allegation of charge No. 1 you have physically assaulted Sri Manish Choudhury, General Manager, Acctts. & Audit Deptt. On 13.03.2011, while he was attending to official duties at the Department along with Sri Kanak Lal Thakuria, S.A. and Sri Mozammil Hoque, Asst. Cashier attached to Printing & Stationery Section in connection with works related to annual closing of Bank A/C. The laborers of the Contractor entrusted for renovation and printing of H.O. Building made the 4th floor i.e. Acctts. & Audit Deptt. Alongwith the members of the staff as in above and the Guard of the Bank Sri Akan Barman were witness to the incident and also witness to your unruly and indecent behavior which tantamount to Criminal Offense besides unbecoming of official behavior and serious breach of office discipline.
You are, therefore, charged with committing gross insubordination, breach of rules, office decorum, misbehavior to Senior Officer of the Bank and culpable misconduct amounting to criminal offence.”
(emphasis supplied by the Court )
V. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a written reply on 16.04.2021 denying the charges. The petitioner took a stand that being a Subordinate Engineer he was directed by the General Manager to renovate and paint the office of the General Manager by an order dated 02.03.2011 and he was directed to co
