IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT '
DATED THIS THE .sa4"* DAY W " 1
BEIf'QRE:A' 2
THE HON'BLE MR. R}STICE; ANANB~
gum...
WRIT PET1T10§_No.g7§36 @2903 13-91:)
BETWEEN:
Sfo K. Dasu !~Ieg§:ie "
K. Prabhakaf L
GeneralVmanag¢:.;?. 4' § _
An ufliéerin T¢;pE§m-mgvejkj% %
Grade Sca5£e---VI ' _
Planning "
Head Ofiice, Vijaya'
, 'Bang:5§.pm¥S60 no; & «
53:43 Residing at
V . V -- ,' 1-1 7A
P«3e§i--¢5'?6 123' -
_Udupi'---Ta!u:k District PETITIONER
N. Prasanna, Advocate fur Shri. P. S. Rajagopal,
jA§i:*§)c;iie)
...:n-nu.
A " " " Vijaya Bank
A handy constituted unéer the
Banking
6
(Acquisiliun & Transfer of
Undcnakings) Act, 1980
Represented by its
Chairman and Managing
Dim-ctor, Head 011343:
4112, M. G. Read
Trinity Circle " --
(By Shfi. Pradecp ' Mfg- Sundarswarriy
This Wi-it is'-;3;g;i-- u;fjdt =&f_A1iiclcs 226 and 2.27 of the
Ctmsiiltiliorg to; Vida: Anntzxum Q dated
4.72002 Anncxure Tribunal
__ Appcliate Authority and etc.
2 having been heard and mscrved on 14.13.2008
V piommrxccrmsnt of orders on $L4'.()2.2009, the
Y dgzaémd the ful}owing:-
4
these was yet another letter dated 22.1.1999 to the:
peiitiomsr had furnished his reply, as well. These
Bank. After the petiiioncr had
two years ihere was nofurthcratiiipn. «
Huwevelf; was served on
were um: Rmnamurihy,
General appointed as an enquiry officer,
swho" ._§vj.<a'v2isLA.l21t¢'<:.f uue Jogappu Shetty an 31.7-2001.
guncludmi on 23.8.2001. Tim petitioner retired
of the Bank alien' nsaching the age uf
on 30.6.2002. He was reiieved fmm services by a
' dated 29.6.2002. This was pnscxsdud by an urder
% daaed 17.52002, which med um though the pain.' )!'i£'.'»'I' would
~ .4 reiim frum stsrvicc, lht: diaciplinary pruceeadings initiated against
him wuuld continue, as ifhe was in svrvicc.
8
13
procedure iaid «town in holding prmxnsdings am to
fuilowcd. Ewen an error of fact, for sufficient
attmct the principles ofjudiciat review-
the entire proceedings are vitiéttt;ti'~.gn at} Vgitrundst
And further that though upon tu
place before: the court between
bank has' 't-:1. while placing certain duoumcnts
at' £13 ..¢;hoi<§: the entire (:0!'I't';'.~spl3!ld6IlC-6, while:
vactuttttfttc maintained by the resptmdent * hank,
an advtzrse iufi:-xencc being drawn against
H Vt .V the «- bank in this vegan} and therefont, the Counsel
% t t subtnia that the petition be allowed.
5. The Counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, wcmid
X n contend that the petitioner has not stated the correct sequcncc of
cvcsxtts. Whilst: thc petitiimcr was heading thc New Dcthi Zonal
2
23
the delinqucnl to Show the micvamze of the
by him and the manner in which the
prejudicial to his case.
«- Tara Clramz’ Ffiaets A
Auihw-ity, (19934 sec 5″6§’:VV:’.’-V.’
This is cited in lhai.vvf i1t§Avvmisc>e)nducl
pmvud is on the basis of which was alnwdy
a part of the which WISIG supplied to the
petitioner- 3 would not vitiate
i11¢¢nq»iI1r%-Li%&
– ‘ vs. State qf West Bengal, (IQ§’8)3
‘ the Supmme Court had axamirztad the scape of
l’:3 i«3f Rule 8 of the All India Services Diwipiinary Rules,
‘ . . _ 2 it is eontezzded that the said Rule is in malaria with
6(I7) of {ha Rcguiaijcms in the cast: on hand. The
Stspaeme Court having held that no pmjmiicc was causud to the
Z
25
which thc finding of misetmduct was
coruasporidcnce being subsequent [ti it
furnishing the of = did L,
of nature} justice.
200?(3)SC it
Whcrein it aims»: attains the
age of it pcmdcncy at disciplinary
be vitiatcd when Regulations
pIuvid§3″t}1at be cunlimmd after the age of
I $i:pc_nmniui£i:}ii;«–.,V
A cuntcnded that the petition be dismissed.
i ii » I way of reply, the Cuunsei for the petitioner wuuid
that the casewlaw cited by the respondent txivzsrs the facts
V , ii cimumstances bf particular uascs, which can be distinguished
and further, he would submit that insofhr as the rcliancc placed on
3
2′?
The findings are on the basis of the material dwuments
made avaiiabie tn the petitioner and when has
opportunity of cmss-examining the in I§:1at.i1_>:i1~vt1_; thus. ‘
Thcncfom, then: is no ttotthc -~
regard. And the authorities ;.g..; an;
mzspondent in support of regards a
limit: invcsti atiun and this
pm my 2. st
court that in some cases, it
could ” H * it vmuid not cause prejudice,
depending tittitstétgtd’ of the rzaspective
‘-it ‘t6″”cbnsider whether in the instagzi $356, the
report as a document which ought
available to the pctitimmr.
V’ ” V’Givm the circumstarwe that the: author uf the document
the suit: witnttss of the management, it caught to be presumed
that the said witness having closely examinud the facts and
circumstances appearing against the would mntinuc to
3»
the exlmme punishment of dismissai, cannot be tenned–._as an
abdication of its duty and discretion-
12. The further contention ths_t….th_e:e
pmceedings against the petitiuner sad
punishment of dismissal was watmmt is sj\Nhich”
the punishment has si.Ir;tp3sed;” set”having been a
mlevant factor ii} the same
would not be holds that the
pmeeedings Firstly, the num-
mv.st;gm report, which formed
the petitioner’ has caused prejudice
V to seeondly, that the enquiry ofiicer having
tuvwith the Regulation 6(I’7)’eI’ the regulations, the
arc’ sifiated. .
X .a.s:.;;rasng1y,am mi: petition is ailowed. Am;exure~Q and
are quashed. The petitioner is entitled to
Vt etixtsequential benefits on his having attained the age of
75
31
supemnnualiun, to which he wouid have been entitled in the usuai
cuurzac and in law. The respondent shall settle the benefits} due to
the peliiioncr within a period ores days, ;1′ not
data: of mccipi of a certified copy of this order.
RV