Back
2013 Supreme(UK) 516
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Alok Singh, J.
SHAMBHU PRASAD JUYAL – Petitioner
Versus
STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 1275 of 2012 (S/S)
Decided on : 20.11.2013
For the Petitioner:Mr. Manoj Tiwari, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Alok Mehra, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate
Headnote:Order of Suspension — Validity of — In writ jurisdiction arising out of the disciplinary proceedings, findings of fact recorded by the disciplinary authority should not be lightly interfered with and penalty imposed should not also be interfered with unless same is found to be shocking — However, if findings recorded by the disciplinary authority are totally perverse or in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, no penalty is warranted — Writ Court should come forward to do complete justice and compensate the employee for loss of reputation due to suspension or termination from the services without there being any serious charge against the employee — Directions for the reinstatement of the petitioner with all consequential benefits and backwages along with Rs. 5 lacs as compensation.
(Paras 14, 16, 17)
fuyEcu vkns’k & oS/krk & fjV vf/kdkfjrk ftldk mn~Hkwr vuq’kklfud dk;Zokgh ls gqvk] mlesa vuq’kklfud izkf/kdj.k }kjk vfHkfyf[kr rF;ksa ds fu”d”kZ esa gLr{ksi ugha pkfg, o vf/kjksfir vFkZn.M ls Hkh gLr{ksi ugha djuk pkfg, tc rd og LrC/k u ik;s tk,a & vkSj vxj vuq’kklfud izkf/kdkjh }kjk vfHkfyf[kr fu”d”kZ vuqfpr ik;k tk, vkSj fof’k”V rF;ksa o ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa vFkZn.M leqfpr u gks & fjV U;k;ky; dks iw.kZ U;k; ds fy, o deZdkj dks fuyEcu ds dkj.k ekugkfu ;k lsok ls i;Zolku ds fy, {kfriwfrZ iznku djuh pkfg, tcfd mlds fo#) dksbZ xaHkhj vkjksi ugha Fkk & isVh’kuj dks iqu% lsok esa ysus] lHkh ifj.kkfed ykHk] ikfj.kkfed o ik¡p yk[k #i;s izfrdj lfgr vnk djus dk funsZ’kA ¼izLrj 14] 16] 17½
Hon’ble Alok Singh, J.
Petitioner was removed from the services vide order dated 31st May, 2012, passed by the Regional Manager (R-1), Disciplinary Authority, respondent No.3. Statutory appeal filed by the petitioner was also dismissed vide order dated 21.08.2012. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court.
2. Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Cashier in the State Bank of India on 07.02.1985; ultimately, petitioner was promoted to the post of Special Assistant in the year 2008; petitioner alongwith his wife Smt. Rajni Juyal purchased plot No. 510 in T.H.D.C. Colony, Rishikesh in the year 2006; thereafter petitioner took housing loan of Rs.10 lacs from Canara Bank alongwith his wife and constructed residential house over the plot purchased by him; petitioner and his wife entered into an agreement to sell with Ranjit Singh Rawat for the sale consideration of Rs.18 lacs somewhere in March, 2008 and then agreement to sell was executed on 11.08.2008; Shri Ranjit Singh Rawat, the prospective purchaser of the petitioner’s house, applied for housing loan; S.B.I. sanctioned housing loan in favour of Ranjit Singh Rawat to purchase house from the petitioner; since property in question was mortgaged with the Canara Bank, therefore, housing loan outstanding against the petitioner was paid to the Canara Bank by Shri Ranjit Singh Rawat through S.B.I. As per the petitioner, since Shri Ranjit Singh Rawat could not arrange entire money within the time stipulated in the agreement to sell, therefore, Shri Ranjit Singh Rawat requested to the petitioner to cancel the agreement to sell and ultimately agreement to sell was mutually cancelled.
3. A show cause notice, annexure No.7 to the writ petition, was issued to the petitioner calling the explanation of the petitioner on two charges. Charges levelled against the petitioner are being reproduced hereunder:-
“1. You have availed following Housing Loan jointly with your wife Mrs. Rajni Juyal from Canara Bank, Clement Town, Dehradun Branch without getting any administrative clearance from the Bank.
Housing Loan A/c No. 2444619000065
Amount Sanctioned Rs.10,00,000.00
Sanctioned on 21.12.2006.
2. You and your wife Mrs. Rajni Juyal have jointly entered into a contract of sale of house situated at Banjarawala Khasra No. 226, THDC Plot No. 510 on 11.08.2008 with Mr. Ranjit Singh Rawat, OMMGS-III (presently posted as Director R-SETI, at Rudraprayag). The house property was already financed by Canara Bank (detailed above). On the basis of your agreement to sell, the Bank has sanctioned Housing Loan for Rs.17,82,000.00 to Shri Ranjit Singh Rawat, OMMGS-III on 27.11.2008 and paid Rs.10,27,255.00 to Canara Bank vide Draft No. 637710 for Rs.5,27,255.00 and Draft No. 637711 for Rs.5,00,000.00 in liquidation of your entire Housing Loan outstanding. In this dealing the following lapses on your part:-
i) You failed to honor your joint agreement of sale dated 11.08.2008 for the said property though your entire Housing Loan outstanding with Canara Bank were liquidated by the Bank on 29.11.2008.
ii) You have subsequently cancelled the deal with Shri Rawat on 12.01.2009 with the commitment that outstanding in the Housing loan account of Shri Rawat, will be liquidated by you, which you failed to do so.
iii) By your above act, the Bank is likely to suffer a loss of Rs.12.27 lacs (i.e. the amount disbursed) plus interest till date.”
4. Petitioner submitted his reply to the show cause notice issued. Ultimately, petitioner was held guilty for both the charges levelled against him and he was removed from the Bank services vide order impugned in the writ petition.
5. I have heard Mr. Manoj Tiwari, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Alok Mahra, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate for the respondents bank and have carefully perused the record.
6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits
