Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
B Giridhar vs The State Bank Of India on 8 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT APPEAL No.635 of 2021
(Through Video-Conferencing)
B. Giridhar, S/o. late Sri Krishna Murthy, aged about 49 years,
Senior Associate, State Bank of India, Bhudhawarpeta Branch,
Presently at Bellary Chowrasta Branch, Kurnool ... Appellant
Versus
The State Bank of India, rep. by its Chief General Manager,
Chapel Road, Brook Bond Colony, Chirag Ali Lane, Abids,
Hyderabad, Telangana State, and others ... Respondents
Counsel for the appellant : Mr. V. Padmanabha Rao
Counsel for respondent : Mr. N. Ashwani Kumar
ORAL JUDGMENT
Dt:08.10.2021
(Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ)
Heard Mr. V. Padmanabha Rao, learned counsel for the appellant and
Mr. N. Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. This appeal is presented against an order dated 22.09.2021 passed by
the learned single Judge in W.P.No.16004 of 2020, whereby the learned single
Judge negated the challenge made in the writ petition to the charge-sheet
dated 20.08.2020 requiring the writ petitioner (appellant herein) to furnish his
explanation.
3. The learned single Judge relied upon the decisions in the case of
Union of India and another v. Kunisetty Satyanarayana, reported in (2006)
2 SCC 28 and in the case of Secretary, Ministry of Defence and others v.
Prabhash Chandra Mirdha, reported in (2012) 11 SCC 565, in coming to the
aforesaid conclusion. The learned single Judge had extracted the relevant
portion of the decision in Kunisetty Satyanarayana (supra). We deem it
appropriate to extract the same for the sake of clarity. The relevant portion of
the said decision reads as follows:
2 HCJ & NJS,J
W.A.No.635 of 2021
"12. In our opinion, the High Court was not justified in allowing the
writ petition.
13. It is well settled by a series of decisions of this Court that
ordinarily no writ lies against a charge-sheet or show-cause notice
vide Executive Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board v. Ramesh
Kumar Singh [(1996) 1 SCC 327 : JT (1995) 8 SC 331] , Special
Director v. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse [(2004) 3 SCC 440 : 2004 SCC
(Cri) 826 : AIR 2004 SC 1467] , Ulagappa v. Divisional Commr.,
Mysore [(2001) 10 SCC 639] , State of U.P. v. Brahm Datt Sharma
[(1987) 2 SCC 179 : (1987) 3 ATC 319 : AIR 1987 SC 943], etc.
14. The reason why ordinarily a writ petition should not be
entertained against a mere show-cause notice or charge-sheet is
that at that stage the writ petition may be held to be premature. A
mere charge-sheet or show-cause notice does not give rise to any
cause of action, because it does not amount to an adverse order
which affects the rights of any party unless the same has been
issued by a person having no jurisdiction to do so. It is quite
possible that after considering the reply to the show-cause notice or
after holding an enquiry the authority concerned may drop the
proceedings and/or hold that the charges are not established. It is
well settled that a writ petition lies when some right of any party is
infringed. A mere show-cause notice or charge-sheet does not
infringe the right of anyone. It is only when a final order imposing
some punishment or otherwise adversely affecting a party is
passed, that the said party can be said to have any grievance.
15. Writ jurisdiction is discretionary jurisdiction and hence such
discretion under Article 226 should not ordinarily be exercised by
quashing a show-cause notice or charge-sheet.
3 HCJ & NJS,J
W.A.No.635 of 2021
16. No doubt, in some very rare and exceptional cases the High
Court can quash a charge-sheet or show-cause notice if it is found
to be wholly without jurisdiction or for some other reason if it is
wholly illegal. However, ordinarily the High Court should not
interfere in such a matter."
4. The learned single Judge had observed that in Secretary, Ministry of
Defence (supra), the same legal position has been reiterated in paras 10, 11
and 12.
5. The learned single Judge observed that the writ petitioner may raise all
contentions in his reply to the charge-sheet dated 20.08.2020 and if a proper
defence is raised, the authority may drop the charge or hold that the charge is
not proved. Accordingly, it was held as follows:
"In that view of the matter, this Court holds in line with the judgment
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that are cited that the writ
petition is not maintainable. It is left open to the petitioner to raise
these issues in his reply and this Court is hopeful that the authority
will consider the reply notice in its proper perspective and pass
orders on merits."
6. It is significant to note that the writ petitioner had not indicated in the
writ petition that he had submitted "tentative explanation" dated 26.08.2020 to
the charge-sheet dated 20.08.2020 while seeking time to give effective
explanation, as relevant documents based on which charges were framed
were stated to be not furnished. Before the authorities could act on the said
explanation, the writ petition came to be filed.
7. Mr. N. Ashwani Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents, submits
that the documents on which reliance is placed while issuing the charge sheet,
had been made available. He, however, submits that request for documents
as mentioned in the reply of the writ petitioner dated 26.08.2020, would again
4 HCJ & NJS,J
W.A.No.635 of 2021
be examined and suitable response will be given within a period of two weeks
from today and the writ petitioner may file further explanation on receipt of the
documents, if any, within a period of three weeks thereafter.
8. Under the circumstances above, we find no good ground to interfere
with the order of the learned single Judge and, accordingly, the writ appeal is
disposed of taking the statement of Mr. Ashwani Kumar on record. The writ
petitioner will submit his explanation within a period of three weeks from the
date of response received from the respondents. No order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ NINALA JAYASURYA, J
MRR
