Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
S.K. SINGH
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19/09/1996
BENCH:
K. RAMASWAMY, FAIZAN UDDIN, G.B. PATTANAIK
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
This petition is filed against the judgment of the
Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gwalior
Bench made on March 13, 1996 in L.P.A. No. 80/96.
The admitted position is that the petitioner was
working as a Branch Manager in the respondent-Bank. A sum of
Rs. 20,000/- was found to be short in cash of the Branch.
Therefore, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against
him and an enquiry was conducted and he was removal from
service. He challenged the order of his removal in appeal
which was dismissed; the writ petition filed by him was also
dismissed by the learned single Judge of the High Court and
on appeal, it was confirmed.
The only controversy raised in the High Court was that
as he was not supplied with the copy of the enquiry report,
the order of dismissal was bad in law. The learned Single
Judge as well as the Division Bench of the High Court have
considered the effect of the judgment of the Constitution
Bench of this Court in Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad
and Ors. v. B. Karunakar and Ors.[(19930 4 SCC 727]. The
learned single Judge as well as the Division Bench of the
High Court had asked the petitioner as to what prejudice the
petitioner had suffered for non-supply thereof. Since there
was no adequate explanation offered by the petitioner, the
High Court came t the conclusion, that though the copy of
the report was not supplied, on the facts, as no prejudice
was proved, it was not a case warranting interference.
It is contended by Sri Khanduja, learned counsel for
the petitioner that since Court has laid down the law that
supply of copy of the enquiry report is a pre-condition for
a competent officer to take a disciplinary action, the
appropriate course would have been to send back the case to
the disciplinary authority. For this course, normally there
is no quarrel, as this Court had settled the law that a copy
of the report needs to be supplied to the delinquent
employee to enable him to make representation against the
proposed action or punishment and, thereafter, the authority
is required to consider that explanation offered by the
punishment. In this case, though copy of the report was not
supplied, he was asked by the learned Single Judge as well
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
as by the Division Bench as to what prejudice he suffered on
account of non-supply of the report; but he was not able to
satisfy the learned Judges as to the prejudice caused to him
on account of non-supply of the enquiry report. On the
facts, we find that there is no illegality in the decision
taken by the High Court.
The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.