Compliance of natural justice in disciplinary inquiry necessary-Supreme Court
The Supreme Court in a recent judgment has dwelt upon the compliance of principles of natural justice in a disciplinary inquiry and summarised the emerging points on the subject.
Case Details:
Civil Appeal No. 2265 of 2011
Chamoli District Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr. (Appellants) vs. Raghunath Singh & Ors. (Respondents)
Date of Judgment: 17-05-2016
Imprtant Judgments Cited:
Sur Enamel and Stamping Works Pvt. Ltd. v. Their Workmen (1964) 3 SCR 616
State Bank of India Vs. R.K. Jain and Ors., reported in (1972) 4 SCC 304
ECIL v. B. Karunakar (1993) 4 SCC 727
Radhey Shyam Gupta vs. U.P. State 1Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. and Another, (1999) 2 SCC 2
Brief Facts of the Case:
The respondent was working as a Branch Manager at Ghat Branch of the Chamoli District of the Appellant Bank. A chargesheet dated 03-07-1992 was issued to him leveling charges against him. The appellant filed reply denying the charges. An Inquiry Officer was appointed to conduct the inquiry in the matter and after Inquiry report was submitted, the respondent was placed under suspension. However, no further steps were taken on the inquiry report.
However, a fresh charge sheet was issued on 16.01.1993. The respondent again denied the allegations. Again, District Co-operative Bank Ltd. issued a show cause notice dated 04-05-1993 and the Disciplinary Authority (DC) passed a Resolution dated 11.07.2000 that charges against the respondent proved. Finally, by an order dated 01.02.2002, DC dismissed the respondent employee.
On appeal, the High Court quashed the dismissal order holding that dismissal orders had been passed without holding an inquiry.
Observation of the Supreme Court on compliance of natural justice in domestic/disciplinary inquiry:
The apex Court considered its various judgments delivered earlier on this subject and emphasised the following observations.
Emerging Points:
The Court summarised the following principles that emerged from its observations:
(i) The enquiries must be conducted bona fide and care must be taken to see that the enquiries do not become empty formalities.
(ii) If an officer is a witness to any of the incidents which is the subject matter of the enquiry or if the enquiry was initiated on a report of an officer, then in all fairness he should not be the Enquiry Officer. If the said position becomes known after the appointment of the Enquiry Officer, during the enquiry, steps should be taken to see that the task of holding an enquiry is assigned to some other officer.
(iii) In an enquiry, the employer/department should take steps first to lead evidence against the workman/delinquent charged and give an opportunity to him to cross-examine the witnesses of the employer. Only thereafter, the workman/delinquent be asked whether he wants to lead any evidence and asked to give any explanation about the evidence led against him.
(iv) On receipt of the enquiry report, before proceeding further, it is incumbent on the part of the disciplinary/punishing authority to supply a copy of the enquiry report and all connected materials relied on by the enquiry officer to enable him to offer his views, if any.
There is no statutory requirement of pre-deposit for stay of demand under Income Tax Act - High Court stayed demand …
Engagement of Company Secretaries (CS) as Young Professionals in the Office of Regional Director (WR), Registrar of Companies, Mumbai and…
Applicability of provisions of Section 115BBE read with Section 69, 69A and 69C in a case arising before Settlement Commission…
Addition u/s 68 for jewellery purportedly received on death of grandparent under Will upheld. In a recent judgment, ITAT upheld…
Supreme Court lays down tests to determine whether a debt is a financial debt or an operational debt under IBC…
Merely because directors of two companies were common not mean that deposits received was bogus and companies were shell companies…