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

2015 Supreme(SC) 419

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.Y. Eqbal, S.A. Bobde, JJ.
Bilaspur Raipur Kshetriya Gramin Bank and another – Appellants
Versus
Madanlal Tandon – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 4467 of 2015 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 22488 of 2012)
Decided On : 15-05-2015

IMPORTANT POINT
Non-compliance with natural justice vitiates departmental enquiry and punishment.

Headnote:Service law – Departmental enquiry – Natural justice – All documents relied upon for sustaining the charges not supplied to delinquent even during enquiry – Departmental proceedings vitiated – Punishment of removal from service rightly quashed. (Para 10)

       Facts of the case:

       The respondent was working as a Field Supervisor in the appellant Bank since 1981. In February, 1984, a charge-sheet was issued to him for having committed misconduct and after a departmental inquiry he was punished with stoppage of two annual increments.

       Thereafter a second charge-sheet was issued to the respondent in November, 1987 alleging that the respondent had committed several financial irregularities in various loan cases. An inquiry was conducted, wherein fourteen charges were found proved against the respondent and three charges were not found proved. Consequently, the punishment of removal from service was inflicted against the respondent on 1.10.1991.

       The Single Judge of the High Court quashed the orders of removal passed by the appellant and allowed the writ petition of the respondent with all consequential benefits.

       The Division Bench of the High Court upheld the order of the learned Single Judge and directed payment towards respondent’s claim of salary up to Rs.5,00,000/-with all consequential benefits.

       Finding of the Court:

       There is no infirmity in the impugned judgment.

       Result: Appeal dismissed.

       

JUDGMENT

M. Y. EQBAL, J.

Leave granted.

2. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 17th February, 2012, whereby Division Bench of the High Court of Chhattisgarh in the writ appeal preferred by the appellants upheld the order of the learned Single Judge and directed payment towards respondent’s claim of salary up to Rs.5,00,000/-with all consequential benefits.

3. The factual matrix of the case is that the respondent was working as a Field Supervisor in the appellant Bank since 1981. In February, 1984, a charge-sheet was issued to him for having committed misconduct and after a departmental inquiry, an order dated 5.7.1984 was passed by the Disciplinary Authority imposing punishment of stoppage of his two annual increments. Thereafter a second charge-sheet was issued to the respondent in November, 1987 alleging that the respondent had committed several financial irregularities in various loan cases. An inquiry was conducted, wherein fourteen charges were found proved against the respondent and three charges were not found proved. Consequently, the punishment of removal from service was inflicted against the respondent on 1.10.1991. Respondent preferred an appeal before the Board of Directors of the appellant Bank, but the same was dismissed.

4. The respondent, therefore, moved the High Court by way of writ petition, inter alia contending that both the charge-sheets being identical, the second inquiry was not competent. It was also contended that along with the second charge-sheet, neither the list of documents nor the documents sought to be relied upon were supplied. It was also contended by the respondent-writ petitioner that appropriate opportunity was not afforded to him to have inspection of the relevant documents and as such the respondent was not in a position to reply the said show cause notice effectively and to defend him in the inquiry. Learned Single Judge of the High Court rejected his first contention and held that the charges were not identical and, therefore, the second inquiry was competent. However, it was held that along with the charge-sheet and imputation of charges, there was no list of documents and list of witnesses were also not supplied as such the respondent was not afforded an opportunity to put forward his case in response to show cause notice along with the charge-sheet. Observing that the object of rules of natural justice is to ensure that a government servant is treated fairly in proceedings which may culminate in imposition of punishment including dismissal/removal from service, learned Single Judge of the High Court quashed the orders of removal passed by the appellant and allowed the writ petition of the respondent with all consequential benefits.

5. Aggrieved by aforesaid decision, the appellants preferred writ appeal, wherein Division Bench of the High Court, after perusing the record, found that although the show cause notice was served along with 17 charges, but no documents were supplied along with the show cause to the respondent. Even the list of documents sought to be relied during the inquiry was not supplied along with the show cause. The Division Bench opined that it is trite law that when a delinquent employee is facing disciplinary proceeding, he is entitled to be afforded with a reasonable opportunity to meet the charges against him in an effective manner. If the copies of the documents are not supplied to the concerned employee, it would be difficult for him to prepare his defence and to cross-examine the witnesses and point out the inconsistencies with a view to show that the allegations are false or baseless.

6. The Division Bench of the High Court further observed that in the instant case neither the list of witnesses nor the list of documents was supplied to the respondent along with the charge-sheet. Though during the course of inquiry some documents were supplied to him but those documents, on which the reliance was placed by the Inqui





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