-1-
IN TIE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. BANGALORE
DATED THIS Tim own DAY or SEPTEMBEI§;A'.I_20_1O
BEFORE '% °A
TI-IE I-IOLPBLE 1vm.JUs'rIcE RAM '«
WRIT PETITION No.22832 161$-"nI:1. 'T. I T
T s A SWAMY
S/O. LATE SIDDAPPA, .
AGE 47 YEARS, CLEFIi;'~.. _ _ ~
R/AT PARVATI-II, 3RD 1VIA1N, CROSS, % _
VIDYANAGAR, HARIHARA .--_ 5?'? f60.I~., ._ _
DAVANAGERE_'DI_STR£CT.' - .. ' I PE'm'IoNER:
(BY SR1. S ADV]
AND: V " ' h '
1 I PRAGAWII' GRAMIN BANK
:_I--IEAD OFFICE; POST BOX 55
_GAND--HINAGAR, BELLARY -- 583 103
"V I. REPQVBY 'ITS CHAIRMAN.
MANAGER
- »._CHIvw{AYEMMIGANUR BRANCH
~. HOLALKERE TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
" 3- MANAGR & INQUIRY OFFICER
PRAGATHI GRAMIN BANK
HOSADURGA BRANCH
BELIIARY TALUK 8: DISTRICT. RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT PETI’I’ION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
& 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF’ INDIA PRAYING TO CALL
M
M2-
FOR RECORDS WHICH ULTIMATELY ‘,.I’I”J,
PASSING OF THE ORDER ANN-A DATED’-..VV12;s;1’o AND
DIRECT THE R1 TO POST PONE THE D’EPARTMEN’TAL~ .
PROCEEDINGS As PER ANN=4A “DAT,ED.;« ..1;2.«3..1o” TILL 2
COMPLETION OF THE PROG_EE.DI_NiGSe, IBEFOVRE,
CRIMINAL COURT As PER ANN;-I-3 IN CRIME NO. 22:2/oa
DATED 19.11.09 REGISTERED BEFORE:”*ii:IE../_..sTA*I’IoI\I’
OFFICER, CHIKKA JA.IU__R=~._ POLICE», fsTATIOI\I OF’
HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADIIRGA DISTRICT; AND ETC.
THIS PETITION “C~oMING .ON§.ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE PoLI,OIA1-‘INo.:t_ .
The cha’rge;sheeted for financial
irregu1a.riti’esI_V’.’I3e:ing in the discharge of
duties as hisi respondent – Pragathi
Gramin V”B_4a1Ik leadirig-7′ to initiation of disciplinary
proc5eediI3.gs, \IIIhiie_..i.t«Is asserted that a First Information
alleging commission of offences under
“s~e¢t1I~ontst 1’4I12o;id4os, 455 read with Section 34 IPC in
Crirr1’e..No.2v22/2009 and in which the State is yet to file
A fa.’ charge-sheet as investigation is in progress. The
‘ petitioner. alleging that a disclosure of his defence in
.4″ the departmentai proceedings would prejudice his case
in the criminal proceedings, has presented this petition
9*
-3-
for a writ of mandamus directing 4′ ‘
postpone the Departmental proceediirigsl’
order dated 12.03.2010
completion of the proceedlingsggbefolethe
in Crime No.22f2./2009….”registered”mbelore the
Investigating Officei*:7 Station of
H olalkere Tal;_tk,__ it
iieeromm MANAGER.
U.P.s:iaTe3;, nor: LAL AND ANOTHER!
held thns:…_g 00 0
V _ “It “”the…..«eharged employee holds a
of trust where honesty and integrity
requirements of functioning, it
Wot.1ld:inVot be proper to deal with the matter
0 leniently. Misconduct in such cases has to
” befldealt with iron hands. Where the person
-Vdeals with public money or engaged in”
financial transactions or acts in a fiduciary
capacity, the highest degree of integrity and
_rM__lt_..m_m__a__i.._._o__.c_n
‘ (2003) 3 sec 605 M
53
.2:
‘: 2
2 (2003; 3 sec 729
trustworthiness is a must’
unexceptionable. ”
3. In the fact situationl”‘noticevcictstipra,
observations of the Apexhfiozirt BOKARO
COLLIERY (TISCO im*D.1e” SINGH2
applies on all its
‘;”2’t’3i”‘p;;l-.’i”he;i-. aside the
repc)rt”‘of. the order of
dismissal _ authority
by obser€;:ing_ “against the
respondent” were beyond
reasonable doirbt; hasvsrepeatedly been
vvoheld Court”t»h-at” the acquittal in a
not operate as a bar for
disciplinary proceeding
It is well–settled
V:’ca..o_e.pi*inciple law that yardstick and standard
;proof’._in criminal case is different from
one disciplinary proceedings. While
t:he_,vs_t§andard of proof in a criminal case is
V'”*..procf beyond all reasonable doubt, the
– . ,;.’:’:.>.~..:~.-e\:~
)EI??s’2–//c.~..«». 1
-6-
6. In the light of the aforesaid observations’:
Apex Court, it is needless to state thatmthe
holding a position of trust, must
integrity, trustworthiness anythzliieiscondiict rnulgst
dealt with appropriately,
disciplinary proceedings. of that is
essential in a one of proof
beyond d:oui)_t”las:_4’a.gainst:lpreponderance of
probabilitlykini..ajdoii1estic.’enquirfgrrthere can be no hard
and ii-ast* »gtvher:_:”dolmestic enquiry ought to be
postpone’d__Vltil1 llafter “a::_ll..’decision in the criminal trial.
g_ Mor’e0yer in theinstant case the criminal investigation
‘ is ‘in -and a charge sheet is not filed.
V accordingly rejected.
V result, the petition being meritless. is
mg’;
KS