Karnataka High Court
The General Manager vs B M Ramaiah on 31 March, 2022
Bench: S.Sujatha, Shivashankar Amarannavar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
W.P. No. 43407/2019 (L - RES)
BETWEEN :
The General Manager
Human Resources Wing
Canara Bank
Head Office
112, J.C. Road
Bengaluru - 560 002. ...PETITIONER
(By Sri. T.P. Muthanna, Adv.)
AND :
B.M. Ramaiah
S/o. late Muniswamappa
Since deceased by his LRS
1. Smt. Shantha
W/o. late B.M. Ramaiah
2 Prathip Kumar B.R.
S/o. late B.M. Ramaiah
-2-
3. Miss. Swetha B.R.
D/o. late B.M. Ramaiah
All residing at
No. 11, 18th cross
Laljinagar
Lakkasandra Extension
Bengaluru - 560 030. ...RESPONDENTS
(By Sri. K.B. Narayanaswamy, Adv., for R-2 and R-3
R-1 served)
---
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India with a prayer to quash the award
dated 03.06.2019 in C.R. No. 15/2006 and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary
Hearing in 'B' Group this day, SHIVASHANKAR
AMARANNAVAR J, made the following;
ORDER
This petition is filed seeking quashing of the award dated 03.06.2019 passed in C.R. No. 15/2006 by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court (for short `the Tribunal'), Bengaluru (Annexure - D).
-3-
2. Heard Sri. T.P. Muthnna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. K.B. Narayanaswamy, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
3. The facts leading to the filing of the present petition are, that the respondent had joined the services of the petitioner - Canara Bank (for short `the Bank') as a Clerk on 23.10.1978 and was confirmed in the services of the Bank on 23.05.1979. He was working at Bommaswandra Branch of the Bank from 28.06.2000. On 17.08.2002 the respondent was entrusted with cashier work. On 19.08.2002 one Sri. Devaraju, holder of S.B. Account No. 10289, called on the Branch and reported that he had remitted Rs.10,000/- to his account on 17.08.2002 but the actual entry in his passbook was only Rs.1,000/-. An investigation was conducted in the matter and the investigation report established the -4- involvement of the respondent and he was placed under suspension with effect from 25.09.2002 for commission of misconduct. He was issued with charge sheet dated 28.11.2002 for commission of gross misconduct. The charge sheet issued against the respondent in brief is as under:
"One Sri. Devaraju, holder of SB Account No. 10289 submitted a complaint to the Branch on 19.08.2002 stating that he had remitted Rs.10,000/- to his SB account on 17.08.2002 but entry in the passbook is Rs.1,000/- only. On investigation, it was found that Sri. Devaraju had remitted Rs.10,000/- himself after getting the credit challan prepared through some other person. The denominations mentioned in the credit challan are Rs. 500 X 10 = 50000 and Rs. 100 X 50 = 5000. The respondent had not reported any excess cash on that day. He was on leave from 19.08.2002 to -5- 21.08.2002. After searching for the challan, the respondent told the Manager that the challan is missing. On 26.08.2002, the respondent discounted a cheque for Rs.12,000/- and remitted Rs.9,000/- to the SB account of Sri. Devaraju by preparing the challan himself and signing the same. He has also unauthorizedly removed the Branch portion of the challan of Sri. Devaraju. The respondent has thus fraudulently retained Rs.9,000/- out of the amount remitted by Sri. Devaraju and temporarily misappropriated the same for his personal gains. Once when the misappropriation was brought to light he had remitted the amount into the account of the beneficiary."
4. A detailed departmental enquiry was conducted in respect of the charge sheet issued against the respondent by appointing an Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer. The Enquiry Officer -6- after holding the enquiry and basing on the documentary and oral evidence that have come on record in the enquiry proceedings has held the respondent is guilty of the charges. During the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer had followed the principles of natural justice and also afforded reasonable opportunity to the respondent to put up his case of defence. The Disciplinary Authority on concurring with the findings of the Enquiry Officer and having regard to the nature of charges touching upon his integrity and honesty alleged against him and the gravity of the charges proved, has imposed the punishment of `compulsory retirement' vide proceedings dated 25.11.2003. Aggrieved by the imposition of the said punishment the respondent preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority on considering his appeal and nature of charges proved in the enquiry rejected the -7- appeal by confirming the punishment imposed on him vide order dated 27.08.2004. Being aggrieved by the order of the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority the respondent had raised an industrial dispute before the Tribunal challenging the punishment imposed on him which was registered in C.R. No. 15/2006. The Tribunal accepted the reference and held that the action of the petitioner Bank in passing the order of `compulsory retirement from service' against the respondent is not legal and not justified and also ordered to pay 60% of the backwages to the class-I legal heirs of the deceased workman within 60 days from the date of publication of the award. The petitioner Bank has challenged the said award in the present petition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the Tribunal without appreciating the -8- evidence of five witnesses and twenty documents produced in the enquiry by the petitioner Bank in support of the charge has accepted the reference and passed the impugned order. It is further submitted that the reasons given in the award for accepting the reference and ordering the payment of 60% of backwages to the legal heirs of the deceased workman is contrary to the documentary and oral evidence that have come on record during the enquiry. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority have acted well within their authority and exercised judicious application of mind while passing the impugned order of punishment. The said orders passed are based on proper reasoning and considering the submissions made by the respondent. There is no illegality or perversity in the said order as held by the Tribunal. The learned counsel further contends that -9- the enquiry was conducted in a free and fair manner, duly complying with the provisions of the Canara Bank Service Code as well as by observing the principles of natural justice by giving adequate opportunity to the respondent to defend his case. The learned counsel further submits that the enquiring authority had found the respondent guilty of the charges leveled against him and the Disciplinary Authority having regard to the seriousness of the charges proved in the enquiry and concurring with the findings of the Enquiry Officer has imposed the punishment of 'compulsory retirement'. It is his further submission that the punishment imposed on the deceased respondent was already done under leniency and as such mentioning the same as illegal and perverse shall not be held good in the eye of law.
- 10 -
6. Learned counsel for the respondent has supported the reasoning assigned by the Tribunal in passing the impugned order. He further submitted that the deceased workman was an ex-service man from the army and was honoured with Sainya Seva Medal and Colour Service Medal. He was a hard worker. His customer service is excellent. Nobody has any doubt about his honesty and integrity. His dedication towards the institution was excellent. He worked for long hours and alone balanced ledger and he helped for recovery of loans, mobilization of deposits etc. The Tribunal, taking into consideration all these aspects and that misconduct of the respondent
- deceased workman was not proved, has rightly passed the impugned order which does not call for interference by this Court.
- 11 -
7. The Tribunal raised a preliminary issue regarding the fairness of the domestic enquiry and adjudicated upon the same and held that the enquiry was fair by giving opportunity to the respondent workman. The respondent workman died during the pendnecy of the proceedings before the Tribunal and his wife, son and daughter were brought on record as legal heirs. The respondent workman tried to justify his acts and has adduced evidence before the Tribunal taking the contention of victimization and unemployment.
8. The complainant has produced Xerox copy of the counterfoil of his challan in which it was written Rs.10,000/- in words and Rs.1,000/- in figures. The office challan was not produced during the enquiry by the prosecution. The Special Assistant had stated that he had seen the original challan in question while
- 12 -
checking the entry and the amount was written in figures as Rs.1,000/- and could not recollect the amount written in words. The Investigating Officer also could not trace the original challan during his investigation. The respondent workman was not a regular cashier and he came late to the Branch on that day and on the order of the Manager he had taken up the cashier work. That being a Saturday there was heavy transaction. The complainant who was unable to speak and write English, had to get the challan filled up by third person who was not examined as a witness. The complainant had not ascertained on 17.08.2002 with others about what was written in the challan after verifying the entry in the passbook. The workman was suspected to have destroyed the bank challan. But, the Enquiry Officer failed to take note of the fact that the Special Assistant had seen the original challan and once the original challan goes to
- 13 -
the Accountant it is he who bundles it and it is not palatable to assume that the respondent workman working in the cash counter gets occasion to take the challan to his custody so as to destroy it. More emphasis was given to the fact that the respondent workman having made good the short of cash had admitted the temporary misappropriation. The respondent workman in order to settle the matter had remitted Rs.9,000/-. The complainant had not produced the original counterfoil challan either before the Enquiry Officer or before the Investigating Officer. There was a discrepancy in the version of the depositor. There appears to be something unnatural on the part of the complainant in not producing the original counterfoil challan. Holding the respondent workman guilty of the misconduct only on the basis of Xerox copy of the counterfoil was not well founded. Considering all these aspects, the Tribunal has rightly
- 14 -
held that not only the enquiry report which is founded on the fragile evidence is perverse but also the punishment order imposed on the respondent workman relying on fragile enquiry report was not legal and justified. There are no good reasons to deviate from the said finding given by the Tribunal. Therefore, the Tribunal has not committed any error in holding that the order of compulsory retirement from service against the respondent is not illegal and not justified. Taking into consideration that the respondent workman has lost four years of his valuable service, his death during the pendency of the dispute and he having wife and two children, the Tribunal ordered for payment of 60% of the backwages, i.e. with effect from 10.12.2003 till the date of superannuation of the workman within 60 days from the date of publication of the award failing which the amount shall bear future interest at the rate of
- 15 -
8% per annum is on the higher side and in our opinion, the deceased workman shall be paid 50% of the backwages which would balance the scales of justice and equity.
In the result, the following;
ORDER I. The writ petition is allowed in part. II. The order impugned dated 03.06.2019 passed in C.R. No. 15/2006 on the file of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court is modified.
III. The legal heirs of the deceased - workman shall be paid 50% of the backwages, i.e. with effect from 10.12.2003 till the date of superannuation of the deceased workman.
IV. In all other respects, the order of the Tribunal remains undisturbed.
- 16 -
V. The Registry shall refund the deposited amount to the petitioner to disburse the same to the legal heirs of the deceased workman as aforesaid.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE LRS.