Punjab-Haryana High Court
H.P. Gupta vs Punjab National Bank And Others on 28 November, 2013
Author: Rameshwar Singh Malik
Bench: Rameshwar Singh Malik
CWP No.7849 of 1993 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
CWP No.7849 of 1993
Date of Decision : 28.11.2013
H.P. Gupta .....Petitioner
Vs.
Punjab National Bank and others ....Respondents
...
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK ...
1. To be referred to Reporter or not ?
2. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ?
...
Present : Mr. J.S. Rana, Advocate for Mr. H.C. Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Samarth Sagar, Advocate for the respondents.
...
RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK, J The present writ petition is directed against the punishment order Annexure P-3 dated 15.9.1992 and the appellate order Annexure P-5 dated 9.2.1993, whereby petitioner was awarded the punishment of censure and simultaneously he was denied the wages for the period of suspension except the subsistence allowance already paid to him.
Facts first.
When the petitioner was serving with the respondent-bank, he was Sahni Greesh 2013.12.06 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.7849 of 1993 2 placed under suspension vide Annexure P-1 on 4.4.1991 as an enquiry was contemplated against him, for certain acts of omissions and commissions relating to the performance of his duties. He was ordered to be reinstated vide Annexure P-2 dated 19.2.1992 pending enquiry. On conclusion of enquiry and submission of report against the petitioner, show cause notice was issued alongwith copy of enquiry report to the petitioner and he filed his reply thereto. The disciplinary authority came to the conclusion that since the petitioner failed to discharge his duties with diligence and also showed insubordination as well as refused to accept the official letter of the Senior Manager, punishment of censure was awarded. However, it was further ordered that the petitioner will not be paid any wages for the period of suspension except the subsistence allowance already paid to him. This punishment order was passed vide Annexure P-3 dated 15.9.1992. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner submitted his statutory appeal vide Annexure P-4. Appeal of the petitioner came to be dismissed by the appellate authority vide order dated 9.2.1993, which was conveyed to the petitioner vide communication dated 11.2.1993 (Annexure P-5). Having been left with no other option, petitioner approached this court by way of instant writ petition.
Notice of motion was issued and pursuant thereto, written statement was filed on behalf of the respondent. In the interregnum, New Bank of India, with whom petitioner was serving at the relevant point of time came to be merged with Punjab National Bank. Civil Misc. Application No.10015 of 1993 was allowed by this court vide order dated 8.10.1993 substituting Punjab National Bank in place of New Bank of India as the respondent-bank. The writ petition was admitted for regular hearing vide order dated 16.5.1994 passed by a Division Bench of this court. That is how, this court is seized of Sahni Greesh 2013.12.06 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.7849 of 1993 3 the matter.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that before passing the impugned punishment order Annexure P-3, no opportunity of being heard was granted to the petitioner, inspite of the fact that civil consequences were bound to follow after passing of the impugned punishment orders. He further submits that petitioner raised different specific and substantial grounds in his appeal Annexure P-4, but neither the issues raised were addressed nor he was granted an opportunity of being heard even by the appellate authority, while passing the impugned appellate order dated 9.2.1993 (Annexure P-5). Learned counsel for the petitioner next contended that the disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority failed to comply with the basic principles of natural justice, while passing their respective impugned orders. He submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the order dated 19.12.1991 passed by a Division Bench of this court in CWP No.2543 of 1991 (P. Sehgal Vs. State of Punjab). Finally, he prays for allowing the present writ petition by setting aside the impugned orders.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-bank submits that the principles of natural justice were complied with in the present case. He places reliance on regulation 15 framed under the Banking Company (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act 1980, to contend that the petitioner was not fully exonerated and his suspension was found justified awarding him the punishment of censure. He submits that further order denying him the wages for the period of suspension except the subsistence allowance was fully justified under Regulation 15(2), being a consequential order, which would not put the disciplinary authority under legal obligation to grant opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. To buttress his submission, Sahni Greesh 2013.12.06 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.7849 of 1993 4 learned counsel for the respondent-bank places reliance on a judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M. Gopalkrishna Naidu Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1968 SC 240. He prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length, after careful perusal of the record of the case and giving thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions raised, this court is of the considered opinion that in the given fact situation of the present case, instant writ petition deserves to be allowed. To say so, reasons are more than one, which are being recorded hereinafter.
A combined reading of both the impugned orders Annexure P-3 as well as Annexure P-5 would show that neither the disciplinary authority nor the appellate authority has even made an effort to grant an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner before passing their respective impugned orders. It is undisputed on record that civil consequences would entail from passing of the impugned orders. In view of this factual aspect of the matter, order dated 19.12.1991 passed by a Division Bench of this court in P. Sehgal's case (supra) would squarely cover the case of the petitioner in his favour. Having said that, this court feels no hesitation to conclude that the disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority failed to comply with the principles of natural justice, while passing their respective impugned orders and the same cannot be sustained.
So far as the judgement relied upon by learned counsel for the respondent is concerned, a careful perusal thereof would show that the same is not applicable to the facts of the present case being clearly distinguishable on facts. It is the settled principle of law that peculiar facts of each case are to be examined, considered and appreciated first before applying any codified or Sahni Greesh 2013.12.06 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.7849 of 1993 5 judgemade law thereto. Sometimes, difference of one additional fact or new circumstance can make the world of difference, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Padmausundrao Rao and another Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2002 (3) SCC 533.
Petitioner has specifically raised his grievance in para 2 of his appeal (Annexure P-4) that he was not even associated during the enquiry proceedings. Further he has taken specific averments in para 9 (2) of the writ petition that he was not afforded any opportunity of being heard before passing the impugned orders. This specific averment has not been denied by the respondent-bank in corresponding paragraph of its reply, thereby impliedly admitting this material fact that no opportunity of being heard was granted to the petitioner either by the disciplinary authority or by the appellate authority. In this view of the matter, it is unhesitatingly held that the disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority have proceeded on wholly misconceived approach, while passing their respective impugned orders, because of which they cannot be sustained.
During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the respondent- bank failed to put into service any substantive argument, so as to convince this court to take a different view than the one taken hereinabove. A serious prejudice has been caused to the petitioner while passing both the impugned orders behind his back, thereby glaringly violating the golden rule of natural justice. Thus, the impugned orders cannot be sustained for this reason, as well.
No other argument was raised.
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case noted above, coupled with the reasons aforementioned, this court is of the considered view that in the peculiar fact situation of the case, instant writ petition deserves Sahni Greesh 2013.12.06 10:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No.7849 of 1993 6 to be allowed.
Consequently, the impugned punishment order Annexure P-3 dated 15.9.1992 as well as the appellate order dated 9.2.1993 (Annexure P-5) are hereby ordered to be set aside, but to the extent denying the petitioner wages for the period of suspension except the subsistence allowance already paid to him. It is so said because the petitioner has prayed only this much and also because the punishment of censure has already outlived its utility.
The respondent authorities are directed to calculate and release the amount due to the petitioner which was denied to him, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order alongwith interest @ 12% per annum, because it is a matter of record that the said amount was being used by the respondent-bank, during all this period.
Resultantly, with the observations made and directions issued, as hereinabove, the present writ petition stands allowed, however, with no order as to costs.
28.11.2013 (RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK)
GS JUDGE
Sahni Greesh
2013.12.06 10:30
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
High Court, Chandigarh