Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Sagar Sadashiv Kasture, was initially appointed as a Clerk in the Central Bank of India on 5 March 1973 and later promoted as an Officer (Grade I) in February 1981. He was subjected to disciplinary proceedings in December 1991 for alleged misconduct committed while working as a Clerk at the Vadgaon Anand Branch between 5 March 1973 and 21 September 1981. The charge was that he misused his position as an employee of the Bank by deriving pecuniary benefits from a loan of Rs.6,500 sanctioned and disbursed on 31 July 1976 in the name of one Manaji Baban Kokane. The petitioner denied the charges. An Inquiry Officer was appointed, who conducted a detailed inquiry and found the charges proved. The Disciplinary Authority, by order dated 28 August 1993, imposed the penalty of removal from service, with the clarification that the order would not be a disqualification for future employment. The Appellate Authority confirmed the order on 1 December 1993. The petitioner challenged both orders by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The main legal issues were whether the disciplinary proceedings were vitiated by delay, whether the principles of natural justice were violated, and whether the punishment of removal was disproportionate. The court held that the delay in initiating proceedings was not fatal as the charges involved moral turpitude and the petitioner had not demonstrated any prejudice. The court also found that the petitioner was given full opportunity to defend himself and that the findings of the Inquiry Officer were based on evidence. On the question of proportionality, the court held that the punishment of removal was not disproportionate to the misconduct, as the petitioner had misused his position for personal gain. The court dismissed the petition, upholding the orders of the Disciplinary and Appellate Authorities.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Misconduct - Bank Employee - The petitioner, a bank officer, was removed from service for deriving pecuniary benefit from a loan of Rs.6,500 sanctioned in the name of a third party. The court held that the charges of misconduct were proved and the punishment of removal was not disproportionate. (Paras 1-10) B) Service Law - Delay in Initiation of Proceedings - The disciplinary proceedings were initiated in December 1991 for misconduct committed between 1973 and 1981. The court held that the delay was not fatal as the charges involved moral turpitude and the petitioner had not raised any prejudice. (Paras 2-5) C) Service Law - Natural Justice - The petitioner was given full opportunity to defend himself in the disciplinary proceedings. The court found no violation of principles of natural justice. (Paras 3-5) D) Service Law - Proportionality of Punishment - The punishment of removal from service was held to be proportionate to the gravity of the misconduct, as the petitioner had misused his position for personal gain. (Paras 6-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order of removal from service passed by the Disciplinary Authority and confirmed by the Appellate Authority is legal and valid, and whether the punishment of removal is proportionate to the misconduct proved.
Final Decision
The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of removal from service passed by the Disciplinary Authority and confirmed by the Appellate Authority.
Law Points
- Disciplinary proceedings
- misconduct
- bank employee
- pecuniary benefit
- removal from service
- Article 226 of Constitution of India
- delay in initiation of proceedings
- natural justice
- proportionality of punishment
