Bombay High Court
Rameshwar Baburao Waghmare vs Chairman Aurangabad Jalna Gramin ... on 25 October, 2016
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala
45wp-94-05.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
45 WRIT PETITION NO. 94 OF 2005
WITH CA/14878/2015 IN WP/94/2005
Mr. Rameshwar Baburao Waghmare ... Petitioner
Age 49 years,Occu: Service,
R/o Ambad Road, Nutan Vasahat,
Taluka and District Jalna.
VERSUS
1. The Chairman,
Maharashtra Gramin Bank,
2. The Chairman and Disciplinary
Authority,
Maharashtra Gramin Bank
3. The Board of Directors i.e. ... Respondents.
Appellate Authority of
the Maharashtra Gramin Bank,
All r/o of Shivaji Nagar,
Nanded.
Mr. V.J. Dixit, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. Ramesh S.
Dhamangaonkar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. V. P. Golewar h/for Mr. A. R. Joshi, Advocate for
the respondents.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
K. L. WADANE, JJ.
DATE :
25th October, 2016
JUDGMENT (Per S.V. Gangapurwala, J.):
1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With
consent of parties, the petition is taken up for final
45wp-94-05.odt
disposal.
3. Mr. Dixit, the learned Senior Advocate appearing
for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was
working as Branch Manager with the respondent bank.
Show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 5th
January, 2016. The petitioner replied the said show
cause notice. on 09.07.1996. The respondents obtained
complaints from various persons and thereafter charge
sheet was issued to the petitioner on 4th November,
1996 in respect of three charges. The learned Senior
Advocate submits that without the complaint being on
record, show cause notice was issued to the petitioner
thereby initiating disciplinary proceedings. Such a
procedure is unheard of. The learned Senior Advocate
further submits that thereafter the Enquiry Officer
was appointed on 10.01.1997. The said Enquiry Officer
was changed and one Mr. Pathak was appointed as
Inquiry Officer. In fact, the said Enquiry Officer
himself was facing the charges of misconduct. Upon
completion of departmental enquiry, the petitioner was
imposed with punishment of compulsory retirement on
account of two charges and one charge was not
presented. The punishment was imposed only on two
charges. The petitioner under Regulation 48 of the
45wp-94-05.odt
Service Regulation, preferred an appeal before the
Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority, did not
assign any reason though substituted the punishment.
The petitioner was brought to the first stage of pay
scale and all increments which were granted to the
petitioner were taken away. The learned counsel
submits that no reasons is given by the Appellate
Authority while passing the order. Various grounds are
raised by the petitioner in his appeal. None of the
said grounds are considered. Validity of the enquiry
proceeding itself was assailed. However, the Appellate
Authority ignored all the said aspects and passed the
order thereby imposing punishment of lowering to the
first stage of basic pay of scale. The punishment was
imposed even in respect of the charge which was not
presented. The same is illegal. In fact the whole
enquiry stands vitiated.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents submits
that serious charges were levelled against the
petitioner that of bribery, misconduct etc. The
Enquiry Officer has adhered to the principles of
natural justice, has given every opportunity to the
petitioner. The charges framed were supplied to the
petitioner and every opportunity was given to the
45wp-94-05.odt
petitioner to adduce evidence. After considering all
the documentary evidence as well as oral evidence,
the Enquiry Officer has concluded the charges having
been proved against the petitioner. The Enquiry Officer
held the charge No.1B and 1C so also charge No.2 as
proved. The Disciplinary Authority compulsorily retired
the petitioner. On appeal, the Appellate Authority took
a sympathetic view against the petitioner and set aside
the punishment of compulsory retirement, instead,
imposed the punishment of lowering the pay scale of
the petitioner. It would be seen that the lenient view
has been taken by the Appellate Authority. This Court
in its writ jurisdiction, would not substitute the
findings of the Enquiry Officer.
5. We have considered the submissions canvassed by
the learned counsel for the respective parties.
6. It is trite that this Court, in its writ
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India would not sit as an Appellate Authority over the
findings of the disciplinary Authority nor would re-
appreciate the evidence. This Court would be concerned
with the adherence of the proper procedure, observance
of principles of natural justice.
45wp-94-05.odt
7. The petitioner was charged with following
charges. The same are as under:
"1) You have taken bribe/illegal
gratification from the following
persons/borrowers for sanction/ disbursement
of loans.
(a) A loan of Rs.3500/- under IRDP was
sanctioned to Smt. Kaibai Janardhan Hogade
r/o Lavani on 23.03.1995 for Kirana shop.
The loan amount is disbursed on 27.05.95
alongwith subsidy. For disbursement of the
loan, you have taken Rs.700/- from the
borrower.
(b)
Head office has sanctioned a loan of
Rs.26,500/- to Shri Kisan Bhaurao Silage r/o
Lavani for agriculture development on
23.03.94. Two instalments of Rs.5500- each
were disbursed by you on 27.05.95 and
25.11.95. You have taken Rs.500/- from the
borrower before submitting the proposal to
head office, Aurangabad for sanction. you
have also demanded petrol charges from this
person whenever you have paid visits to his
field.
(c) Under MPBCDC Scheme you have sanctioned
a loan of Rs.6262/- to Smt. Yasodabai Baba
Rathod r/o Mosa for goat unit on 23.11.1994.
The said loan amount is disbursed alongwith
subsidy Rs.2088/- on 22.10.95. For
sanction/disbursement of the loan, you have
taken a bribe of Rs.2000/- from the
beneficiary.
Above acts on you part show your
vested interest, irresponsible behaviour.
Thus you have committed an act of-
i) Malafide and dishonest behaviour.
ii) violating the procedure and norms of the
bank.
45wp-94-05.odt
iii) Not serving the bank honestly and
faithfully.
Your above acts are misconduct under
regulation No.19 of the Aurangabad-Jalna
Gramin Bank (Staff) Service Regulation,
1984.
2) As recommended by you, Head office has
sanctioned a loan of Rs.26250/- to Shri
Jadhav Subhash Rambhau r/o Yedalapur under
VJNt scheme for bricks business. The first
installment of Rs.8500/- alongwith subsidy
Rs.2800/- has been disbursed and credited to
his S/B A/c No. 1830 on 3.6.96. On 8.6.96,
Bank of Maharashtra, Ner Branch has given
letter No. NIL debated 8.6.96 stating that
the said person has availed loan from them
and is in default and also requested not to
disbruse him loan. Ont he basis of this
letter officiating Branch Manager very
rightly returned the cheque No.162134 for
Rs.10400/- received for collection from SBH
Jalna on 7.7.96 since the balance in the SB
A/c was in respect of the loan amount
through the reason stated was refer to
drawer. The borrower again issued cheque
No.162135 dated 6.7.96 for Rs.1000/- in his
father's name and received to the branch for
collecting through SBH, Partur. Instead of
taking the cognizance of Bank of Maharashtra
letter dt.8.6.9. You has passed the cheque
on 18.8.96.
Above acts on you part show your vested
interest, irresponsible behaviour. Thus you
have committed an act of-
i) Not serving the bank faithfully and
honestly.
ii) Negligence iwth dishonest behaviour.
iii) Violated the procedure and norms of the
bank."
8. Upon the enquiry being conducted, the charge
45wp-94-05.odt
No.1(a) was not presented. However, the Charge No.
1(b), 1(c) and 2 were held to be proved. The
disciplinary Authority awarded following punishment.
Char Charges Punishment
ge Awarded
No.
01 Charge Not presented --
A
B Bribe taken for illegal Compulsory
gratification of loan to retirement from
Shri Kishan Bhaurao service.
Silage r/o Lawani
C Bribe taken for illegal Compulsory
gratification of loan to retirement from
Smt. Yashodabai Babu services.
Rathod
2) Loan Stoppage of one
sanctioned/disbursed increment.
under NJNT scheme to
Shri R.S. Jadhav inspite
of instructions received
from Bank of Maharashtra
Ner branch that Shri
S.R.Jadhav is their
defaulter.
9. The petitioner filed an appeal, raising various
grounds. The Appellate Authority passed a final order
on 17.11.2003 which reads as under.
"FINAL ORDER
In pursuant to the earlier final order issued
by the Chairman & Disciplinary Authority vide
No. HO/Personnel/C.Hd.2002-3 dated 19.4.2003
retiring compulsorily from the services, Shri
45wp-94-05.odt
R.B. Waghmare preferred an appeal before the
Board as Appellate Authority requesting to
withdraw the punishment given by the
Disciplinary Authority.
The Board of Directors considered the appeal
made by Shri R.B. Waghmare in the board
meeting held on 31.10.2003 and on compassionate
ground decided to reinstate Shri R.B.Waghmare
on starting basic pay in Scale I.
As per the board resolution, the punishment is
awarded as under:
Charges Punishment
awarded
1) Charge Lowering to
No.1 A,B,C the first stage
of basic pay of
scale I.
2) Charge Lowering to
No.2 the first stage
of basic pay of
scale I.
All the punishments will run concurrently.
As per the earlier final order Shri R.B.
Waghmare was not on duty w.e.f. 19.04.2003. As
per the Board & Appellate Authority's decision,
he is reinstated in Scale-I from the date of
this order. As regard to the period of his
absence, it will be treated as "Not on duty"
and hence without pay. He will not be entitled
for any remuneration for this period."
10. Appeal is provided under regulation 47 and 48 of
45wp-94-05.odt
the Officers and Employees Services Regulations, 2001.
The Appeal is substantive right of the petitioner. The
petitioner had exercised the said right. It is also
trite that when the Appellate Authority concurs with
the judgment of the disciplinary Authority, lengthy
reasons need not be given. However, the Appellate
Authority is required to deal with the averments of the
appellant raised in the appeal memo. Some reasons are
required to be given while negativing the grounds
raised by the petitioner in the appeal. Perusal of the
order passed by the Appellate Authority, it is manifest
that the same is bereft of any reason. Reasons depict
the application of mind of the Authority passing the
order. It depicts the subjective satisfaction of the
Authority, based on objective assessment of the
circumstances and evidence on record. Reasons, now a
days, are considered to be a third limb of the
principles of natural justice. The order of the
Appellate Authority, being bereft of any reasons, not
depicting the application of the mind of the Appellate
Authority, cannot be sustained. Though the Appellate
Authority, on compassionate ground, had reduced the
punishment, however having failed to consider the
grounds agitated by the petitioner in his appeal,
45wp-94-05.odt
thereby has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested
in it.
11. In light of the above, the impugned order of
the Appellate Authority cannot be sustained.
12. The order passed by the Appellate Authority is
quashed and set aside.
13. The parties are relegated before the Appellate
Authority. The Appellate Authority shall reconsider the
appeal of the petitioner and decide the same afresh.
14. Till the appeal of the petitioner is decided by
the Appellate Authority, the benefit which the
petitioner is being given on the basis of the order of
the Appellate Authority that is set aside by the
instant judgment shall continue and further course of
action shall be taken in tune with the judgment that
would be delivered by the Appellate Authority in the
appeal filed by the petitioner. The Appellate Authority
shall decide the said appeal afresh expeditiously,
preferably within six months of the date of receipt of
this order.
15. The petitioner if so chooses, may present
himself before the Appellate Authority.
45wp-94-05.odt
16. Rule is made absolute accordingly. There shall
be no order as to costs.
17. Civil application stands disposed of.
(K. L. WADANE, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. )
JPC
