Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank vs Sandip Kumar Singh
2025 Latest Caselaw 3268 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank vs Sandip Kumar Singh on 25 June, 2025

                                                          1/4




SOURABH
BHILWAR
                            HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed by
SOURABH BHILWAR
Date: 2025.06.26
10:54:27 +0530
                                              WA No. 394 of 2025

                        CHHATTISGARH RAJYA GRAMIN BANK versus SANDIP KUMAR
                                                     SINGH

                                                 Order Sheet


                      25/06/2025         Heard Mr. Sabyasachi Bhaduri, learned counsel

                                   for the petitioners.


                                         Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                                   against the order dated 27/03/2018 passed by the

                                   learned Single Judge in WPS No. 2377/2018 (Sandip

                                   Kumar Singh vs. Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank &

                                   Ors.) he preferred a review and the same was decided

                                   by order dated 17/02/2025 hence the present appeal

                                   against the said judgment.


                                          It is argued that on the basis of the judgment

                                   passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of

                                   State Bank of India & Ors. vs. Neelam Nag & Anr.
                   2/4

reported in (2016) 9 SCC 491, the departmental

proceeding have been stayed whereas the criminal

trial is also pending against the respondent No. 1. It

has been further stated that out of 66 prosecution

witnesses, only statements of 14 witnesses have

been recorded and 08 years have been passed.

In support of his contention, he relied upon the

judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the

matter of D. Ganesan vs. Union of India reported in

2024 SCC OnLine SC 4071 wherein the Supreme

Court has held that there is no legal bar on running

such parallel proceedings though in certain situations.

He further submitted that though 100 charges were

framed against the respondent but the charges which

have been framed in the departmental proceedings

are not the same and the witnesses in the

departmental proceedings are also different besides

there appears to be some common witnesses. He

would further submit that 08 years have been passed

of the departmental proceedings, which have been

stayed hence the order dated 17/02/2025 be set

aside.

It is further argued that even in the case of

Neelam Nag (supra) which has been relied upon by

the learned Single Judge if the trial is not concluded

within one year from the order passed by the learned

Single Judge, the departmental proceedings against

the respondent can be resumed by the enquiry officer.

The relevant part of the judgment passed by the

Supreme Court in the matter of Neelam Nag (supra)

is read as under :-

"29. If the trial is not completed within one year from the date of this order, despite the steps which the trial court has been directed to take, the disciplinary proceedings against the respondent shall be resumed by the enquiry officer concerned. The protection given to the respondent of keeping the disciplinary proceedings in abeyance shall then stand vacated forthwith upon expiry of the period of one year from the date of this order."

Issue notice to the sole respondent by ordinary

post as well as registered post and that shall be served

through the trial Court.

Process Fee be paid within a week.

Let the matter be listed for appearance of the

respondent through counsel or in person on

15/07/2025.

                                Sd/-                           Sd/-
                         (Bibhu Datta Guru)              (Ramesh Sinha)
                              Judge                        Chief Justice




S. Bhilwar/ Jyoti