Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Termination in sbi

(Querist) 18 March 2015 This query is : Resolved 
My friend, who joined with State Bank of India as Probationary officer in Mar 2011 was terminated in Jun 2013 even after extending his probation in May 2013.The reason cited is he has not disclosed a pending case (Marriage related)against him. The case is settled in Jan 2013 in Lok Adalat.He has got a notice by SBI in Dec 2012 reg the case and Case is settled in Jan 2013. The details are submitted by him to Bank.Later, after extending probation, he is terminated.

Probation is for a period of 2 years. After completion of 2 yrs probation period, Bank extended the probation citing a ground that the candidate has to improve the subject but not on the ground of the case. Later after extension of probation, within 1 month, service is terminated. The case is a false case Under Sec 417,420 Under sec 34 and also under sec 3,4 of Dowry prohibition act(resolved in Jan 2013 in Lok adalat)

The case came to the notice of SBI while making enquiry about antecedents. The judgement is given by lok adalat is a compromise award is given between two parties and the case is closed. The termination notice contained details of the sections of the case. But, it didn't mention about the case in extension letter given in Apr 2013."

Now what he had to do. Is there a chance of him getting back the job. Please guide
M/s. Y-not legal services (Expert) 18 March 2015
A matrimonial litigation can not be bar to service. Consult an advocate.. He has remedy before the high court by filling a Writ petition.
Kumar Doab (Expert) 18 March 2015
Agreed. Consult an able lawyer.

You have posted that he informed the bank of the case...........whereas Bank claimed that he did not?

When did he inform the bank?

Who has informed the bank of this case and why did the bank resort to termination on getting this information? He may obtain certified copies thru RTI.

Let his lawyer examine all docs and details and opine that can he sue on these counts too.
Devajyoti Barman (Expert) 18 March 2015
You Are silent on the nature of case. if it is under section 498A then Bank may not be convinced.
Guest (Expert) 18 March 2015
Send an appeal against termination order to the competent appellate authority in the bank.
Rajendra K Goyal (Expert) 18 March 2015
Since you were on probation and as per your appointment terms Bank may extend the probation and or terminate the services during probation /.

In the termination letter what reason was mentioned?

As you have hided the material information regarding your cases at the time of appointment, it seems Bank has acted in accordance to your appointment terms.
Rajeswariii (Querist) 19 March 2015
Sir, Thanks for the suggestions. I want to give clarification to the case.Probation is for a period of 2 years. After completion of 2 yrs probation period, Bank extended the probation citing a ground that the candidate has to improve the subject but not on the ground of the case. Later after extension of probation, within 1 month, service is terminated. The case is a false case Under Sec 417,420 Under sec 34 and also under sec 3,4 of Dowry prohibition act(resolved in Jan 2013 in Lok adalat)
Guest (Expert) 19 March 2015
Partial facts may not help you get appropriate solution. You have not stated, how the case came to notice of the SBI? Also, you have not mentioned, what exactly was the judgment of the lok adalat? You have also not mentioned, whether the termination notice of the SBI contained any reason of the case u/s 417/420/34, etc.?
Rajeswariii (Querist) 20 March 2015
For the comments of Sri Dhingra, The explantion is The case came to the notice of SBI while making enquiry about antecedents. The judgement is lok adalat is a compromise award is given between two parties and the case is closed. Yes, the termination notice contained details of the case. But, it didn't mention about the case extension letter given in Apr 2013.""
Isaac Gabriel (Expert) 22 March 2015
Expert Thangapandian has rightly observed and suggested filing writ petition.It could be only remedy in this case.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Expert) 22 March 2015
I cannot agree to the views expressed by Mr Thangapandian.

because

You are hiding the facts.

You have only stated that :-

(i) there was matrimonial dispute.
(ii) your friend has hidden it from bank.
(iii) Bank came to know of the same during antecedent check.
(iv) This lead to his termination.

I can well understand that only criminal cases can surface during antecedent check because police keeps no record of civil litigation. You have also stated that the case was compromised. This indicates that your friend is not acquitted on merits.

You have also stated that the allegations are of 417/420 which relate to lack of integrity. Be enlightened that even if these allegations are made to a serving Govt employee then his deptt can initiate disciplinary proceedings even without waiting for court verdict and dismiss him from service because lack of integrity even in private life is professional misconduct for Govt servants warranting extreme penalty.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Expert) 22 March 2015
Further please read the attestation form submitted by him alongwith undertaking at the bottom.
Isaac Gabriel (Expert) 23 March 2015
Pl.check up whether the judgement below will be useful.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19.12.2014
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN
W.P.NO.33748 OF 2014


A.Velusamy Petitioner
Versus
1. Tamilnadu Generation & Distribution
Corporation rep.by the Chairman/
Managing Director, Head Quarters
Complex, 144, Anna Salai,
Chennai 2

2. The Chief Internal Audit Officer,
Audit Branch, Tamilnadu Generation
& Distribution Corporation,
NPKRR Maligai, 1st Floor,
144, Anna Salai, Chennai 2. .. Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the panel for promotion to the post of Internal Audit Officer notified by the 1st respondent in his Proc.No.1 (Audit Branch) dated 10.11.14 in the appropriate place over and above his juniors.
For Petitioner : Ms.M.Srividhya
For Respondents Ms.R.Varalakshmi

O R D E R
The petitioner is working as an Assistant Audit Officer in the respondent Corporation. Unfortunately, the petitioner has some family dispute with his wife. He got married on 23.1.2004. He also filed a petition for divorce in H.M.O.P.No.121 of 2011 on the file of Principal Subordinate Judge's Court, Tiruchy. His wife also filed H.M.O.P.No.10 of 2007 for restitution of conjugal rights and the same was dismissed on 23.12.2010. While so, his wife has filed private complaint before the Jurisdictional Magistrate alleging that the petitioner got married while marriage with her was in subsistence. Based on the aforesaid private complaint, the grievance of the petitioner is that he is not included in the panel of Assistant Audit Officer fit for promotion to the post of Internal Audit Officer for the year 2014-2015 in Proceeding No.1, Audit Branch, dated 10.11.2014.
2. In view of the aforesaid proceedings initiated by his wife, the petitioner was placed under suspension on 1.8.2011. However, later the suspension was revoked and he was restored to duty from 23.1.2012. Thereafter, for the reasons best known to the respondents, no annual increment was sanctioned to the petitioner. In these circumstances, the petitioner made a representation dated 10.12.2014 to the respondents to include his name in the panel for promotion to the post of Internal Audit Officer for the year 2014-2015. As no orders were passed, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. He has also prayed for an interim direction to grant him annual increment with effect from 1.4.2012 onwards.
3. At the time of hearing of the writ petition, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has prayed for disposal of the representation of the petitioner dated 10.12.2014.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. I am of the view that if there is only some family dispute between the petitioner and his wife relating to their marriage, the same cannot be put against the petitioner for promotion. Even if a private complaint for bigamy is pending I am of the view that the same cannot be put against the petitioner. It is a different matter if allegation is made by the wife that the petitioner assaulted her and a criminal case is pending under Section 326 of IPC or a F.I.R is registered under Section 307 IPC. Therefore, I am of the view that the employee cannot be deprived of promotion on the ground that there is some family quarrel between the employee and his wife. The same can be taken note of while deciding the representation of the petitioner dated 10.12.2014. Further, once the petitioner was restored to duty he has to earn the increments automatically. Therefore, there is no reason for the respondents in not granting the annual increments to the petitioner. The annual increments could be declined only when there is a punishment that would be operating against him. It is not so. Hence, I am of the view that the respondents shall also sanction the increments to which the petitioner is entitled to. The 2nd respondent is directed to dispose of the representation dated 10.12.2014 in the light of the observations made above and a further direction is issued to the respondents to pay the annual increments in the light of the observation made above within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
6. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
19.12.2014
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
usk
To
1. The Chairman/Managing Director,
Tamilnadu Generation & Distribution
Head Quarters
Complex, 144, Anna Salai,
Chennai 2
2. The Chief Internal Audit Officer,
Audit Branch, Tamilnadu Generation
& Distribution Corporation,
NPKRR Maligai, 1st Floor,
144, Anna Salai, Chennai 2.
D.HARIPARANTHAMAN, J.
usk
Kumar Doab (Expert) 23 March 2015
The judgment quoted by Mr. Issac Gabriel can certainly be useful.
Isaac Gabriel (Expert) 25 March 2015
The link below,which is the Supreme court order may be an appropriate decision to your case

http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/judiciary/Minor-supression-of-fact-of-pendancy-of-criminal-cse-is-no-big-issue-for-appointment-2893.asp#.VRInK_yUcbA
Rajeswariii (Querist) 27 March 2015
Thank you very much Issac Gabriel Sir. The case of ours almost looks like this case you mentioned. Can we quote this case in Highcourt while defending the case??
Isaac Gabriel (Expert) 27 March 2015
Your lawyer will take care of.
Kumar Doab (Expert) 29 March 2015
Agreed with Mr. Gabriel.

The decisions shall show the way and infuse confidence.


Decide with your lawyer the citations and time to cite.
Rajeswariii (Querist) 31 March 2015
Issac Sir, Thank you very much sir. One more query is " The Bank gave a show cause notice regarding the pending case on 10.12.2012 giving a deadline of 31.12.2012 to answer. My friend replied on 31.12.2012 to give one month time to submit proofs defending his version. Accordingly, he got the case resolved in Lok adalat on 29.01.2013 and submitted the proof and explanation on 07.02.2013. Later, on 02.04.2013, he was given an extention of probation letter indicating that his performance need to improve. No information relating to show cause and his explanations. Later after one month, on 03.05.2013, he was issued a termination order mentioning the show cause letter. No mention is given about the probation extention letter. My query is when a letter is given by a bank subsequent to the show cause notice, is the letter given supersedes or overtakes the show cause?? Please kindly explain.
Isaac Gabriel (Expert) 31 March 2015
The bank initially forewarned about the criminal case.Thereafter,switched over alleging performance.Probation extension is an afterthought decision to do away with your services.File a writ petition.
Rajeswariii (Querist) 01 April 2015
Sir, Can you please quote any resolved case resembling the above situation. You have mentioned to my query as ""The bank initially forewarned about the criminal case.Thereafter,switched over alleging performance.Probation extension is an afterthought decision to do away with your services.File a writ petition."" regarding our case.
Rajeswariii (Querist) 01 April 2015
Sir, My friend already filed in High Court in 2013. The case is still pending and he is in deep finanicial & mental crisis. With the case you suggested, we got a hope. Hence, we request your suggestion in the above mentioned topic" The Bank gave a show cause notice regarding the pending case on 10.12.2012 giving a deadline of 31.12.2012 to answer. My friend replied on 31.12.2012 to give one month time to submit proofs defending his version. Accordingly, he got the case resolved in Lok adalat on 29.01.2013 and submitted the proof and explanation on 07.02.2013. Later, on 02.04.2013, he was given an extention of probation letter indicating that his performance need to improve. No information relating to show cause and his explanations. Later after one month, on 03.05.2013, he was issued a termination order mentioning the show cause letter. No mention is given about the probation extention letter"" Please suggest any case which is resolved in favour of the employee and help him to get his job.
Isaac Gabriel (Expert) 03 April 2015
Seek the advise of your councel for next course of action.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Expert) 04 April 2015
You are very well playing hide and seek. Now you are intimating that your frind has already appealed in High Court. That means he already has a lawyer and 5Kgs of papers. No useful advise can be given withtout seeking the papers.

On the basis of the facts disclosed so far I can only understand :-

(i) The judgement dated 19.12.14 of MAdras High COurt quoted by Mr Issak Gabriel pertains to a case where the accused was alleged u/s 308/326. SUch allegations are only criminal matters and not professional misconduct.

(ii) In the present case you intimated that the proceedings against your friend are u/s 417/420 - which relates to lack of integrity which (even in private life) is profession misconduct for Govt employee.

(iii) In this case also the High Court did not give substantial relief it only directed the deptt to dispose off the representation.

(iv) You have not so far stated as to whether at all your friend has given any representation and whether it is pending with the Bank.

I do agree wth the observation of Mr Gabriel that the change of stand b Bank is apparent which may (if /when full facts are disclosed by you) may be weakening their stand.
Rajeswariii (Querist) 06 April 2015
Thank you Issac Sir. We will follow your advice.
Rajeswariii (Querist) 24 November 2015
Issac Gabriel Sir, Good Morning.

One small request Sir. Jainendra Singh's case in Supreme Court of India (5671/2012) also seems to be a case similar to our case and the case of Jainendra Singh is referred to larger bench of Supreme Court in 2012. Can you please inform me what is its latest position??


You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries :