The acquittal in a criminal court does not preclude disciplinary proceedings, as the purpose and scope of each proceeding are different. No authority would ordinarily act whimsically or erroneously.

1. The petitioner, a clerk/cashier of the Kottayam Branch of the Union Bank of India, was prosecuted for offences punishable under S.409, 467 and 477 A of the Indian Penal Code, for alleged forgery of a cheque and unauthorised withdrawal of amounts from the account of one of the bank's constituents. The criminal court acquitted him on the ground "that the prosecution had failed to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt". Notwithstanding the acquittal the management of the Bank decided to proceed against the petitioner departmentally, by issuing Ext.P1 charge-sheet and appointing an enquiry officer. The petitioner "objected to the holding of the enquiry" on various grounds, but the Bank management was not prepared to relent. This writ petition was thereupon filed in December, 1982 challenging the authority of the management to take disciplinary action against its employees in respect of acts of omission or commission of which they are already adjudged not guilty by the criminal court of the land. (The challenge to Ext.P3 was not pressed at the hearing).

2. It is common ground that in matters relating to "disciplinary action and procedure therefor", the first respondent-bank and its employees are governed by the provisions of Chapter XIX of the settlement dated 19-10-1966 entered into between the Indian Banks' Association and the Bombay Exchange Banks' Association on the one part, and their workmen represented by the All India Bank Employees' Association and the Ali India Bank Employee' Federation on the other. Clause.19 (3) of the said settlement reads:

"19 3 (a) When in the opinion of the management an employee has committed an offence, unless he be otherwise prosecuted, the bank may lake steps to prosecute him or get him prosecuted, and in such a case he may also be suspended.

(b) If he be convicted, he may be dismissed with effect from the date of his conviction or be given any lesser form of punishment as mentioned in Clause.19.6 below.

(c) If he be acquitted, it shall be open to the management to proceed against him under the provisions set out below in Clause.19.11 and 19.12 infra relating to discharges. However in the event of the management deciding after enquiry not to continue him in service, he shall be liable only for termination of service with three months pay and allowance in lieu of notice. And he shall be deemed to have been on duty during the period of suspension, if any, and shall be entitled to the full pay and allowances minus such subsistence allowance as he has drawn and to all other privileges for the period of suspension provided that if he be acquitted by being given the benefit of doubt he may be paid such portion of such pay and allowances as the management may deem proper, and the period of his absence shall not be treated as a period spent on duty unless the management so direct.

(d) If he prefers an appeal or revision application against his conviction and is acquitted, in case he had already been dealt with as above and he applies to the management for reconsideration of his case, the management shall review his case and may either reinstate him or proceed against him under the provisions set below in Clause.19.11 and 19.12 infra relating to discharge, and the provision set out above as to pay, allowances and the period of suspension will apply, the period up-to- date for which full pay and allowances have not been drawn being treated as one of suspension. In the event of the management deciding, after enquiry not to continue him in service, the employee shall be liable only for termination with three month's pay and allowances in lieu of notice, as directed above".

In as much as Clause.19 (11) and 19 (12) deal with the procedure to be followed in issuing charge-sheets, holding enquires etc. the implication of Clause.19 (3) (c) is clear: even if an employee is acquitted of the offence with which he is charged in a criminal court, the management of the bank will have th