Disciplinary proceedings are invalid if an employee is not given a fair opportunity to defend themselves, particularly when circumstances like incarceration prevent their participation.

JUDGMENT :

J.J. Munir, J.

1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the Secretary/ Chief Executive Officer, Agra District Cooperative Bank Limited, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Agra dated 28.12.2023, dismissing the petitioner from service, after holding disciplinary proceedings.

2. The Agra District Cooperative Bank Limited, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Agra (for short, 'the Bank') is a Cooperative Society registered under the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 (for short, 'the Act') and its rules. The conditions of service of employees of the Bank are governed by the provisions of The U.P. Cooperative Societies Employees' Service Regulations, 1975 (for short, 'the Regulations of 1975'). The petitioner was appointed on 27.01.1996 on the post of a Sahyogi. Ever since, he has remained in the Bank's service continuously. On the 28^th of April, 2015, the petitioner was promoted as Clerk-cum-Cashier. He asserts that his work and conduct have been satisfactory and unblemished. On the 5^th of September, 2021, while the petitioner was travelling in Kullu in the State of Himachal Pradesh, he was apprehended and falsely implicated in a criminal case by the Narcotics Control Bureau (for short, 'NCB') under Sections 8 , 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'NDPS Act'). He was arrested and remanded to judicial custody, pending trial.

3. The case against the petitioner was registered as Crime No.58 of 2021 for offences punishable under Sections 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act. He was tried by the Special Judge-I, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh vide Case No.14 (24) of 2022 and acquitted vide judgment and order dated 28.06.2024. He remained incarcerated in Kullu, Himachal Pradesh from 05.09.2021 to 28.06.2024. The Special Judge-I, Kullu, while acquitting the petitioner, recorded a finding that the prosecution had utterly failed to establish the charge against the petitioner, and it would be highly unsafe to return a finding of guilt, on the basis of 'highly discrepant evidence led by the prosecution'. While the petitioner was in jail, he suffered a heart attack and was admitted to the Dr. Rajendra Prasad Rajkiya Ayurvigyan Mahavidyalaya and Chikitsalaya, District Tanda. While still incarcerated, the petitioner was dismissed from service by the Bank, a fact of which he was vicariously informed through his family members at his residence. The information, however, was not conveyed to the petitioner on account of his medical condition at the time the order was made. On being released from jail, the petitioner made inquiries with regard to the order of dismissal. He has proceeded to institute the present writ petition, challenging the order of dismissal from service.

4. The petitioner's case is that while he was in jail, the Authorities of the Bank, treating his absence to be unauthorized, issued notices dated 28.09.2021 and 06.12.2021. Later on, on the basis of what was regarded as unauthorized absence from duty, disciplinary proceedings were instituted against the petitioner and the Deputy General Manager (Administration) of the Bank appointed the Inquiry Officer. The Inquiry Officer issued notices dated 14.02.2022, 08.03.2022, 15.03.2022 and 18.06.2022, requiring the petitioner to participate in the departmental inquiry. It appears that on 21.12.2021, a decision was taken by the Committee of Management of the Bank to institute departmental proceedings against him vide Resolution No.9 and an Inquiry Office