Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
N. Unni krishnan Nair
Dipen Hazarika, S/o Lt. Lila Kanta Hazarika – Appellant
Versus
State Bank of India, Rep. By The Chairman And Managing Director – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
N. Unni krishnan Nair, J.
Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. L. Talukdar, learned counsel appearing for all the respondents.
2. The challenge in the present proceeding is to an order dated 12.09.2013, issued by the disciplinary authority imposing the penalty of dismissal from service upon the petitioner on conclusion of a departmental proceeding instituted against him. The petitioner has also challenged the enquiry report dated 06.08.2013, as well as the order of appellate authority dated 26.05.2014.
3. Before proceeding further, it would be appropriate to briefly encapsulate the relevant facts so as to have a proper perspective of the case.
4. The petitioner herein was initially appointed as a Cashier-cum-Clerk-cum- Typist in the State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Bank’) and posted at its Hayuliang Branch, Arunachal Pradesh. The petitioner joined his services on 10.09.1987. The petitioner, while working as a Senior Assistant at the Doomdoma Branch of the Bank, was vide a communication dated 30.10.2009 placed under suspension basing on allegations of commission of irregularities/lapses and contemplation of disciplinary
A disciplinary authority may order a further inquiry to correct deficiencies in initial proceedings when necessary for ensuring justice, provided it does not violate principles of natural justice.
The Disciplinary Authority can order further enquiry only if serious defects exist in the initial enquiry; it cannot do so after a finding of exoneration.
The court reaffirmed that disciplinary proceedings must strictly adhere to procedural requirements, including proper approval of chargesheets and the necessity of oral enquiries, to ensure fairness a....
The responsibility of the employee to maintain trust and the principles of natural justice were central to the court's decision.
Distinct allegations against employee charged in the same transaction would be justified being based on a valid classification and no perversity or arbitrariness can be alleged in the process.
Removal from Service - Committed irregularities - Procedure for imposing major penalties - Power of judicial review available to High Court as also to this Court under Constitution takes in its strid....
Disciplinary proceedings quashed for defective charge memo without imputations, documents, witnesses; no departmental evidence or witnesses; perfunctory enquiry report lacking independent reasons and....
The failure to provide crucial documents and examine key witnesses in a departmental inquiry violates natural justice and Article 311(2) of the Constitution, warranting annulment of the imposed penal....
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
