Service and Labour Law — Disciplinary proceeding — Disciplinary authority

August 24th, 2013

Service and Labour Law — Disciplinary proceeding — Disciplinary authority in disagreement with finding of inquiry officer, Punishment without seeking explanation, Legality of — By impugned judgment, Division Bench reversed the judgment and order of Single Judge by which Single Judge allowed the writ petition, holding that in case the Disciplinary Authority disagrees with the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer, he must record reasons for the dis-agreement and communicate the same to the delinquent seeking his explanation and after considering the same, the punishment could be passed — Held, as the case is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in Kunj Behari Misra, no reason to approve the impugned judgment rendered by the Division Bench — Appeal allowed — Judgment of Single Judge is restored — Punjab National Bank Officers Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1977 — Regulations 6 & 7 — Administrative Law — Natural justice.

Punjab National Bank & Ors. v. Kunj Behari Misra, AIR 1998 SC 2713, Relied on.

Yoginath D. Bagde v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., AIR 1999 SC 3734; State Bank of India & Ors. v. K.P. Narayanan Kutty, AIR 2003 SC 1100; J.A. Naiksatam v. Prothonotary and Senior Master, High Court of Bombay & Ors., AIR 2005 SC 1218; P.D. Agrawal v. State Bank of India & Ors., AIR 2006 SC 2064; Ranjit Singh v. Union of India & Ors., AIR 2006 SC 3685 & Canara Bank & Ors. v. Shri Debasis Das & Ors., AIR 2003 SC 2041, Referred.

(Para 13)

S.P. Malhotra v. Punjab National Bank[Bench Strength 2], Civil Appeal No. 5128/2013 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 39105/2012)(04/07/2013), 2013(9) JT 309: 2013(4) Supreme 590: 2013(9) SCALE 113 [B.S. Chauhan, J.: Sharad Arvind Bobde, J.]

Entry Filed under: Legal Updates