Judicial review of disciplinary action is warranted where punishment is shockingly disproportionate to the charges, emphasizing the requirement of adhering to natural justice and proportionality in sanctions.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY PRASAD, J.

This writ petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner-Bank for the following reliefs:-

“(i) For the issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions or a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the Award passed by Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer of the Industrial Tribunal No.2 at Dhanbad in Reference No.12 of 2006 dated 19.01.2012 whereby and wherein the punishment of degradation of 10 lower stage in incremental scale from 15.10.2001 passed by the Chairman and Disciplinary Authority to Respondent No.1 Sri Awinash Kumar Sinha Staff/Clerk-Cashier was held to be unjustified and directed the Management of the Bank to upgrade the aforesaid 10 lower stages in incremental scale with all consequential benefits.

(ii) For the issuance of a further appropriate writ, order or direction to quash the notification of Award by Govt. of India/Bharat Sarkar, Ministry of Labour/Shram Mantralaya, New Delhi dated 09.02.2012 whereby and wherein the Award of Reference No.12 of 2006 of the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court No.2, Dhanbad in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Giridih Kshetriya Gramin Bank and their workmen was published and also for other ancillary reliefs.”

2. The case of the petitioner-Bank, in brief, is that the Respondent No.1 was employed as a Clerk-cum-Cashier at Jamua Branch of the erstwhile Giridih Kshetriya Gramin Bank from 08.03.1995 to 07.06.1996. The Respondent No.1 is alleged to have committed lapses irregularities and misconduct during the said period. He was issued a Charge sheet No.HO: IR:0073/97-98 dated 09.05.1997 served to the Respondent No.1 by the erstwhile Giridih Kshetriya Gramin Bank. Thereafter charge sheet were served upon him on 16.05.1997 for conducting irregularity on 10.08.1995 for sanctioning a loan of Rs.7500/- in the name of fictitious person Gokul Rana from then Manager of the Bank for committing misconduct on 20.11.1995 for posting two Debit Vouchers of Rs.5600/- cash and Rs.211.95 in his Account No.680 and causing loss of Rs.30/- for receiving payment of Rs.70/- on 22.11.1995 against withdrawal form dated 22.11.1995 and for not attending the duties on several dates in the year 1995.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

4. It is submitted that the impugned Award passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the Industrial Tribunal No.2, Dhanbad is illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that the enquiry was fairly and properly conducted against the Respondent-Workman and the Disciplinary Authority, after considering the Enquiry Report and also considering the charges stand proved against the petitioner, had imposed the penalty of degradation of ten (10) incremental stage by taking lenient view instead of terminating the Respondent-Workman from the services. It is submitted that the scope of Domestic Enquiry is limited and the Tribunal cannot examine evidence led during Domestic Enquiry and cannot arrive at its own conclusion by merely stating that the enquiry was not bona fide and there was basic error of fact. The learned Tribunal was in error in passing the Award in favour of the Respondent-Workman because the Domestic Enquiry was not conducted in violation of principles of natural justice.

5. It is su