Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dinkar Rajaram Sarap, was employed as a Branch Manager at the Central Bank of India, Kaulkhed Branch, Akola. He was charge-sheeted with about fifteen charges. After a disciplinary inquiry, the Disciplinary Authority found the charges proved and imposed the penalty of dismissal from service. The Appellate Authority confirmed the dismissal order, and the review preferred by the petitioner was also dismissed. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. The main ground of challenge was that the petitioner was not provided an opportunity of personal hearing by the Appellate Authority, and no findings were recorded on all the objections raised against the findings of the Disciplinary Authority. It was also urged that the aspect of proportionality of punishment was not considered. The petitioner relied on Rule 17 of the Central Bank of India Officer Employees' (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976, and the Full Bench decision of this Court in Anil Amrut Atre v. District and Sessions Judge, Aurangabad. The High Court, without going into the merits of the findings, held that the matter must be remanded back to the Appellate Authority to provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. The court left all other challenges open to be considered by the Appellate Authority. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Right of Personal Hearing in Appeal - Rule 17 of Central Bank of India Officer Employees' (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976 - The petitioner, a dismissed bank manager, challenged the dismissal on the ground that the Appellate Authority did not provide a personal hearing and did not consider proportionality of punishment. The High Court held that the matter must be remanded to the Appellate Authority to provide an opportunity of personal hearing, leaving all other challenges open. (Paras 3-5) B) Service Law - Appellate Authority - Duty to Record Findings - Rule 17 of Central Bank of India Officer Employees' (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976 - The court noted that the Appellate Authority failed to record findings on all objections raised by the petitioner against the findings of the Disciplinary Authority. The court remanded the matter for fresh consideration. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner was denied an opportunity of personal hearing by the Appellate Authority and whether the Appellate Authority failed to record findings on all objections raised and consider proportionality of punishment.
Final Decision
The High Court remanded the matter to the Appellate Authority to provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and to decide the appeal afresh. All other challenges were left open.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- Right of personal hearing in appeal
- Proportionality of punishment
- Rule 17 of Central Bank of India Officer Employees' (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations
- 1976
