An employee's admission obtained under duress cannot solely validate dismissal; fair procedural adherence and corroborative evidence are essential in disciplinary actions.

ORDER :

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

This Writ Petition is filed challenging the award of the Central Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Chennai dated 15.12.2009 in I.D. No.79 of 2007. By the said award, the claim petition preferred by the workman was dismissed.

2. By an order dated 28.11.2007, the Government of India referred the following question for adjudication :

“Whether the action of the management of Indian Bank in imposing the punishment of ‘dismissal without notice’ on Shri. J. Jacob Selvam is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?’

3. The workman filed a claim petition. It is his case that he was appointed as a Clerk/Shroff on 13.06.1990 under sports quota. While so, he was placed under suspension on 25.07.2002 when he was working at Egmore Branch. Explanation was called for from the petitioner on 29.11.2002 for certain allegations as regards fraudulent withdrawal, fraudulent authorisation of vouchers, signing of pay-in-slip as customer etc. It is also referred that the workman had accepted his guilt on his own volition by his letter dated 24.07.2002. The workman prayed for time to submit his explanation as there was some delay in the Union assisting him, but the disciplinary authority chose to conduct enquiry. The enquiry officer conducted enquiry from 05.05.2003 to 16.07.2003 and it was held that the charges were proved. Without considering the further explanation submitted by the petitioner, in a prejudged manner, a final order of dismissal was passed on 27.03.2004.

4. Challenging the said order, the workman filed an appeal, however, the appeal was also dismissed on 22.02.2005. There are serious violations in the enquiry conducted by the bank. The admission letters were given under duress and tremendous pressure. It is clear that during the enquiry, it transpired that the workman would be involved, immediately the manager and others rushed to the house of the workman created a fear psychosis of severe police action. The various shortcomings in the enquiry and the evidence were also pointed out. Therefore, it was prayed that the punishment should be set aside and reinstatement with back wages should be ordered.

5. The claim was resisted by the management. One Mr.M.Abdul Wahab was having NRE SB Account No.12034 and as on 02.02.2002, there was a balance of Rs.5,75,380.95. He was also having NIR/RIP for Rs.24,95,500/- which had matured on 04.04.1988. His legal heirs submitted a claim which was forwarded by the Egmore Branch to its legal department on 22.06.2002 for clearance. The legal department cleared the title of the legal heirs. On 22.07.2002, when they called the branch, the manager found that there was fraudulent withdrawal and only Rs.550.70 was remaining as balance. By means of cheques between 17.03.2002 and 03.05.2002, the amounts were withdrawn. On verification of the cheque book register, it was further observed that the cheque book contained 20 leaves which were entered in the cheque book register on 14.03.2002.

6. On 23.07.2002, when the fraud was reported to the Circle Office Mr.K.Viswanathan, the Senior Manager/Investigating Officer, carried out investigation on 23.07.2002, 24.07.2002 and 25.07.2002. When the cheques were verified, it showed that they were all drawn by a single person who was having the habit of making a dot after every writing in a particular manner. While observing the pattern in which the cheques were filled up by comparing the handwriting of the various staff, it was suspected that the Workman was involved in the episode. When the Workman was confronted, he admitted his guilt and on 25.07.2002 he remitted a sum o