SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Telangana) 291

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J.
P.T.M. Gopala Krishna - Petitioner
Versus
Chief General Manager & Appellate Authority, SBI, Hyderabad and Another - Respondents
Writ Petition No.13041 Of 2020
Decided On : 03-05-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri Prabhakar Sripada, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Arshad Ahmed
For the Respondents: Sri B.S. Prasad, learned Senior Counsel representing Pearl Law Associates.

Disciplinary actions in banking must adhere to principles of natural justice and ensure parity in punishment among co-delinquents, as disparities can indicate bias and unjust treatment.

Headnote:(A) State Bank of Hyderabad (Officers) Service Regulations, 1979 - Regulation No.67(i) - Disciplinary action against the petitioner for influencing the issuance of fake educational loan sanction letters resulting in reputational loss to the bank - Allegations included coercing branch managers and aiding fraudulent activities. (Paras 1, 15, 46, 48)

(B) The principle of natural justice - Proper inquiries required before imposing disciplinary actions - The disparity in punishment between the petitioner and branch managers raises questions about fairness and bias within the disciplinary process. (Paras 46, 48)

(C) Judicial review of disciplinary proceedings emphasizes adherence to procedural correctness and parity among co-delinquents. (Paras 12, 28, 46)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner joined the bank in 1988 and was charged with involvement in issuing fraudulent loan letters after a complaint raised suspicion in 2016. Following inquiries, removal from service was imposed due to the severity of allegations. (Paras 3, 8, 37)

Findings of Court:
The court held the disciplinary action was disproportionate relative to the actions of other officers involved and indicated harmful bias. (Paras 48)

Issues: Main issues were the alleged misconduct by the petitioner, procedural fairness during the inquiry, and disparity in punitive measures against co-delinquents. (Paras 46, 48)

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the investigative process lacked balance and fairness in comparison to other employees involved, emphasizing the necessity of maintaining equity in disciplinary actions. (Paras 12, 46, 48)

Result: Writ petition disposed of; petitioner directed to appeal for lesser punishment instead of removal. (Para 49)

Table of Content
1. writ petition challenges removal from bank service. (Para 1 , 2)
2. background on disciplinary action against bank officer. (Para 3 , 6)
3. petitioner denies influencing branch managers. (Para 4 , 5)
4. discussion on the adequacy of evidence in disciplinary proceedings. (Para 7)
5. concerns over the credibility of witness statements. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
6. arguments regarding the lack of clear evidences. (Para 11)
7. the question of proportionality and fairness in imposed penalties. (Para 12 , 13 , 15)
8. defense laid over procedural fairness in hearing. (Para 14 , 16 , 21)
9. judicial review principles applied to disciplinary actions. (Para 22 , 25 , 26)
10. appellate authority's obligation to provide reasoning. (Para 30 , 31)
11. standards for maintaining integrity in bank professions. (Para 34 , 36)
12. disproportionate punishments against petitioner compared to peers. (Para 46 , 47)
13. direction for reconsideration of punishment. (Para 48 , 49)

ORDER :

(Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao, J.) :

This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 18.07.2019 vide HR/AR/No.16 passed by the first Respondent confirming the order of punishment of “Removal from Service as provided in Regulation No.67(i) of the State Bank of Hyderabad (Officers) Service Regulations 1979” by the 2nd Respondent vide No.BCDM/LHO/HYD/347 dated 26.12.2018.

2. Heard Sri Prabhakar Sripada, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Arshad Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri B.S. Prasad, learned Senior Counsel representing Pearl Law Associates, learned counsel for the respondents.

3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

i) The petitioner joined the respondent Bank as a Junior Associate on 05.09.1988, and his probation was confirmed after six months, i.e., on 05.03.1989. Later, the petitioner was promoted as Assistant Manager in normal channel on 01.12.2002. Subsequently, he was promoted as Deputy Manager on 01.12.2006 and finally as Manager on 01.11.2012.

(ii) On 16.08.2016, an E-mail from one Sri Nishidhar Reddy Borra, General Secretary of the Association of Australian Education representatives (AAERI) in India, was addressed to the Deputy General Manager, State Bank of Hyderabad, Gunfoundry, informing about the receipt of fraud educational loan sanction letters issued by various Branch Managers of the State Bank of Hyderabad. It was further stated in the said e-mail that they have come across such fake education loan sanction letters issued by different branches of SBH, including the Green Park Colony and Panderghast Road Branches. It was further stated that some Branch Managers of the SBH were also involved along with their associates in the fraud. Some of the identified consultants are one Mr. Sagar and one Mr. Srinivas. It was further informed that a copy of the mail has also been marked to the integrity cell of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection Australia. Accordingly, he requested the competent authority of the SBH to conduct a detailed investigation in respect of the said branches and take appropriate action.

(iii) Pursuant to the developments above, the petitioner, during his tenure as MSME at Moulali Branch from August 2015 to October 2017, was issued a Show Cause Notice dated 12.10.2017, requiring him to offer his explanation in respect of the serious irregularities and lapses said to have been committed by him. The petitioner submitted his reply on 23.10.2017, denying the allegations against him in the Show-Cause Notice. Not being satisfied with the petitioner’s reply, the Disciplinary Authority issued a Chargesheet dated 30.07.2018 under State Bank of Hyderabad (Officers) Service Regulations, 1979, against the petitioner framing the following articles of charges:

(i) You have influenced and pressurized Sri T Bhuvan Mohan, Branch Manager, Green Park Colony, Hyderabad and Sri K Chandra Sekhar, Branch Manager, Prenderghast Road Branch, Secunderabad and forced them to issue pre-printed fake educational loan san

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top