Back
2005 Supreme(Ker) 319
Judges : J.B.KOSHY,K.T.SANKARAN
The Union Bank of India - Appellant
Versus
M.Chandrasekhran Nair - Respondent
Case No : W.A.Nos.3063 of 2002 & 263 of 2005
Decided On : 06/06/2005
Advocates Appeared :
For the Appellants: A.S.P. Kurup, SC, UBI, K. Ramakumar, Advocates. For the Respondents: A. Balagangadhara Menon, (SR), M. Jacob Murickan, Advocates.
Headnote:
Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Misconduct - Fact that the loan was availed of in the name of two customers and bank has given two pay orders in the appellant's name and it was credited in the appellant's account in another branch, is not disputed - It is a very serious misconduct - When the matter was found out, the loan was repaid will not in any way reduce the seriousness of the misconduct - Held, The Courts cannot insist that under all circumstances and under different statutory provisions personal hearing have to be afforded to the persons concerned - If this principle of affording personal hearing is extended whenever statutory authorities are vested with the power to exercise discretion in connection with statutory appeals, it shall lead to chaotic conditions - Many statutory appeals and applications are disposed of by the competent authorities who have been vested with powers to dispose of the same - Such authorities which shall be deemed to be quasi-judicial authorities are expected to apply their judicial mind over the grievances made by the appellants or applicants concerned, but it cannot be held that before dismissing such appeals or applications in all events the quasi-judicial authorities must hear the appellants or the applicants as the case may be.
Koshy, J.
The appellant in Writ Appeal 263 of 2005 approached this Court challenging the order of dismissal confirmed by the Appellate Authority. He was employed as a Brach Manager of Nellikkode Branch of the first respondent – Union Bank. He was served with Ext. P2 statement of allegations. The allegation was that while he was serving as Branch Manager at Nellikkode Branch, the following omissions took place:
1. Failure to take all possible steps to ensure and protect the interest of the Bank and to discharge his duties with utmost integrity, honesty, devotion and diligence.
2. Acting otherwise than in his best judgment in the performance of his official duties.
The relevant portion of Ext. P2 statement of allegations are as follows:
“Mrs. Prasanna Bhardwajan had deposited an amount of Rs.1.00 lac for 15 months with Nellikkode branch (Deposit No. 8764054/2005 dated 06.09.96). Its maturity date was 06.03.99. In this connection, it is observed that Mrs. Prasanna Bharadwajan had requested the Bank vide her letter dated 30.11.96 to sanction a loan of Rs.85,000/- and the same to be paid to one Shri C.S. Nair, who will call on the Bank. In this letter, Shri C.S. Nair was not identified by Mrs. Prasanna by a attesting his signature. Shri M. Chandrashekaran Nair has sanctioned the loan on 13.12.96 after a lapse of nearly a fortnight though the request was made on 30.11.96. The loan amount was not paid by cash by disbursed by pay order. The pay order credit voucher as well as the loan debit voucher was prepared and signed by the branch Manager, Shri M. Chandrashekaran himself alone. Acknowledgement from shri C.S. Nair was not obtained for having delivered the pay order to him. D.P. Note obtained for the loan amount was incomplete except for the signature of the borrower i.e., Mrs. Prasnna and lien letter, i.e. FD 318 was also not available on records. The pay order that was present by Bank of India, Mavoor Road branch in clearing on 14.12.96 and honoured by Nellikkode branch was not available in the branch for verification as the entire day’s voucher bundle was missing. In this connection, on inquiring with the Bank of India, Mavoor Road branch, it is observed that the pay order was credited to the Branch Manager, Shri M. Chandrashekaran Nair’s SB a/c No. 888 maintained with them. Mrs. Prasanna is maintained SB a/c No. 5221 with Nellikkode branch. The request letter i.e. application for loan was typed one whereas in other loans was sanctioned against deposits, the request letters were either handwritten or cyclostile.
It clearly indicates that the loan sanctioned in the same of Mrs. Prasanna Bhardwajan has been availed by Shri M. Chandrashekaran Nair himself and has defrauded customer/Bank by misutilising his position.
Likewise, Shri P. Bhardwajan had deposited an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- with Nellikkode branch for 36 months (deposit No.8764012 NRE/DRC dated 08.07.96). The maturity date of the loan was 08.07.99 Shri Bhardwajan was first sanctioned a loan of Rs.1.00 lac and the same was credited to his NRE SE a/c No. 2454 after the sanction on the same day i.e. 29.07.96. The second loan of Rs.1.00 lac was sanctioned on 05.05.97. However, there was neither request letter nor documents in respect or the second loan. The second loan of Rs.1.00 lac was disbursed by way of pay order favouring Shri C.S. Nair on 05.05.97 and the same was credited by Bank of India, Mavoor Road branch, Calicut on 07.05.97 to the credit of Shri M. Chandrashekaran Nair’s SB a/c.No. 888 maintained with them. This loan debit and pay order credit vouchers were also prepared and signed by Shri M. Chandrashekaran Nair only and this voucher bundle dated 07.05.97 was also missing from the branch.
Though both Shri Bhardwajan and Mrs. Prasanna are maintaining SB a/c with Nellikkode branch, the loan amount sanctioned as above were not credited to their accounts with Nellikkode branch.
In both the cases, the loan sanctioned have been availed by Shri M. Chandrashekaran N
