Seek opinion on judgement passed by a single bench of delhi high court
neeru
(Querist) 24 May 2015
This query is : Resolved
Dear Sir,
I have retired as General Manager from Small Industries Development Bank of India in August 2010. The issue for which I seek expert advice is as under.
During 1990-95 I was posted in Delhi as Deputy Manager which was a medium level management post. I was dealing with Bank's Bill Discounting scheme besides all other work. Three accounts defaulted in 1995 and as a result I was shifted from the Department and thereafter transfered to Lucknow. Somewhere, in 1996-1997 CBI investigated these accounts . [(The accounts were Mideast India Ltd and Mesco Phermaceuticals Ltd. beloging to Ms Rita singh and one Asian Consolidated Industries Ltd.) In respect of Mideast and Mesco, CBI I filed chargesheet wherein i alongwith two other officers of the Bank are named accused. The case is being contested by me. This is only for your information and is not the subject matter of this query.)].
In October 2000 Bank issued 3 letters in respect of the above three companies seeking my clarification which I duly submitted. In January 2002, Bank issued one consolidated chargesheet consisting of 17 charges which had sub charges etc.
The inquiry was conducted by CVC appointed Inquiry Officer which was concluded in November 2002. Somewhere in 2004 I was given a copy of the IO's report wherein 14 out of 17 charges were proved and 3 charges were partly proved. I was asked to submit my comments on the report which I duly submitted within the given time. Thereafter, on 24/5/2005 I was advised by a letter from an officer of HR Dept. junior to me that DA has inflected the punishment of lowering of rank w.e.f. from 18/5/2005 and that it has been made effective from the same date. Aggrieved, I made an appeal to the appellate authority which is Board of Directors of the Bank in September 2005.
In August 2007 I was advised through a letter dated 8/8/2007 that the appellate authority has decided to restrict the punishment period to two years and thereafter I was to be restored the my original Designation of General Manager. Accordingly, I was again elevated to GM's post and financial dues were paid w.e.f 18/5/2007.
The letter further stated that the Board has directed the Bank to provide me with a copy of orders passed by Disciplinary Authority. Bank therefore provided me with a copy of two orders passed by Disciplinary Authority. Second was the successor of first DA after his retirement. It was for the first time that I came to know that Bank has been seeking advice from CVC in the matter. Also that while first DA has proposed stopping of three increments for two years as punishment but after obtaining second stage advice from CVC, the second DA has changed it to lowering of grade for indefinite period. I consulted a few advocates and filled a writ No WP(C)5208/2008 on following grounds.
There was a delay of around 7 years in issuing the charge sheet.
In terms of regulation 46(2) of SIDBI staff Regulations no punishment can be inflicted unless signed by CMD in respect of officer of Grade B and above. (I may add here that I was Grade E officer since 1998). I was only advised through a letter signed by an officer junior to me of the punishment and copy of the orders passed by DA were never provided to me before inflicting the punishment. In fact those were provided alongwith the appellate authority's order.
Relevant portion of the writ is attached for your perusal.
Submission to the Hon'ble High Court was made in person. In fact at the advice of Hon'ble judge, written submissions were filed. AThe same are also enclosed for your information.
The writ was dismissed and the order is posted at http://lobis.nic.in/dhc/VJM/judgement/12-05-2015/VJM07052015CW52082008.pdf
Whatever I have understood the order is defective in so many ways. there are issues which have not been considered or discussed. The issues which are discussed were not properly adressed. These are as under :
The charge sheet was modified at the instance of Inquiry officer and the original charge sheet was only for negligence whereas the second chargesheet included misconduct. My argument was that CVC jurisdiction comes only when there is a charge of curreption. Since there was no charge of corruption in the Charge sheet in Regulation 46(6) of SIDBI regulation. Similar rule is there for Govt. employees and psus and public sector Banks. I refered to case of Nagraj Karjagi v/s syndicate Bank. Therefore my contention was that Neither it was required to have an IO from CVC nor there was need for CVC first or second stage advice. However the interpetation of the judge is different (Para 6). Similarly, on CVC issue the judgement says that there was no provision for consulting CVC etc. but it was not my contention. Rule 46(6) provide for consultation with CVC in respect of charges of corruption. But his interpretation is different and self contradictory.
Consulting CVC and not sharing its advice with the Charged officer is against the principal of natural justice (Para 10 and 11).
While Bank conceded for restoring the seniority, no direction has been given to effect the same. It effect not only my seniory, it involves backdated promotions etc.
Issues which are critical and have not been discussed in the Judgement
Copy of the two orders passed by DAs were not provided however, the punishment inflicted. Orders were provided much after the punishment was over and on the direction of appellate authority.
Copy of the CVC advice was not provided to me. CVC guidelines and D C Sharma V/s SBI and Nagraj Karjagi V/s Syndicate Bank case were highlighted.
Since there is a limit to one file only, i am enclosing my written submission to Delhi High Court which were submitted at the instance of Hon'ble Judge.
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 24 May 2015
query too long.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 26 May 2015
1. Too long story and not a query.
2. What is the opinion, advise and guidance of your lawyer?
3. Consult another local lawyer with all relevant documents/details of the case for a second opinion, if you desire.
4. However, if you are dissatisfied with the expertise and performance or lost faith in your lawyer straight away change him/her immediately.
Anirudh
(Expert) 26 May 2015
Dear Ajit Kumar Saraswat (Neeru),
The High Court has dealt with each and every argument of yours before disposing of the writ petition filed by you.
The decision is dated 7th may. We are now less than 20 days after the decision. The order copy of the decision might not have even reached the Respondent Bank. In any case, it is for you to attach the copy of the judgment and make a representation to restore your position and seniority after the conclusion of the punishment inflicted upon you.
Except getting the restoration of seniority and position, and consequential promotions, if any, you do not have anything further to agitate in appeal.
The technicalities which you urged in the Writ petition has not come to your rescue.
neeru
(Querist) 26 May 2015
Dear Shri Anirudh,
There are still a few things which have not been mentioned in the judgement such as copy of the punishment orders duly signed by the CMD was not given to me before inflicting the punishment which is one of the condition as per regulation.When these copies were given, term of the punishment as per the appellate authority's order was over. That is when for the first time i came to know that CVC is advising the Bank on punishment. Was is not a point to be discussed in the judgement. Further while the Hon'ble justice is discussing the CVC advice on para 10, has he not missed that the order is certainly influenced by CVC advise. (The bank in his rejoinder has stated, "although bank has pleaded for leniency in the matter"
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 29 May 2015
Expert Mr. Anirudh has clearly made his views which seems to be satisfactory, you may peruse the judgement once again and proceed as suggested.
Anirudh
(Expert) 29 May 2015
Dear Ajit Kumar Saraswat (Neeru),
If you think that these things are going to in any way change the verdict, I AM SORRY.
The problem is you think you have a big point in your favour. THAT IS A PITY!
THERE IS NOTHING FURTHER LEFT IN THE CASE.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 02 June 2015
Well advised, agree with the expert Anirudh ji.
