Shubham Yadav vs Bank Of Baroda
2018 Latest Caselaw 1210 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                         Date of Order : February 20, 2018
+                      W.P.(C) 6037/2017 & CM No.25065/2017
       SHUBHAM YADAV                                   ..... Petitioner
               Through:          Mr.Sumit Kumar, Mr.Abhishek Chakraborty
                                 and Mr.Hemant Kumar, Advocates
                                 versus
       BANK OF BARODA                                  ..... Respondent
                Through:         Mr.Bhupendra Singh Chauhan, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
                                  ORDER

(ORAL)

1. Petitioner was working as a cashier with respondent-bank on 12th April, 2017 when he was charge-sheeted and vide Representation of 7th July, 2017 (Annexure P-5), petitioner had sought stay of departmental inquiry till the conclusion of criminal case i.e. RC-DAI-2017(A)0016. Petitioner's Representation (Annexure P-5) stands declined by the Inquiry Officer vide order (Annexure P-6) of even date, while noting that the proceedings in the criminal case are yet to commence. Attention of this Court is drawn to a Communication of 12th July, 2017 (Annexure P-1) filed along with Additional Affidavit of 21st July, 2017 which reveals that the Disciplinary Authority had called upon petitioner to provide copy of the charge-sheet filed by CBI in the criminal case against him. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that charge sheet in the criminal case is still not filed as the investigation in the criminal case is at final stage. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the basis of departmental proceedings as well as the W.P.(C) No.6037/2017 Page 1of 3 criminal proceedings is identical and the criminal case was registered first in point of time, therefore, its outcome ought to be awaited and thereafter initiation of departmental action has to be considered.

2. Attention of this Court is drawn by respondent's counsel to order of 12th April, 2017 (Annexure P-1) and the relevant extract of this order is as under:-

"It is also notified that in terms of aforementioned Circular, The Dy.Zonal Head (DGM), Bank of Baroda, New Delhi Zone, New Delhi will be the Appellate Authority to deal with and to dispose of any appeal that the said Mr.Shubham Yadav may prefer against the order of the undersigned Disciplinary Authority."

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that no appeal against rejection of petitioner's Representation by the Inquiry Officer vide order (Annexure P-5), which was communicated on 12th July, 2017, was filed as the said Representation is under consideration of the Disciplinary Authority.

4. In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to permit petitioner to file an appeal against order of 7 th July, 2017 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Inquiry Officer to the Deputy Zonal Head (DGM), Bank of Baroda, New Delhi Zone, New Delhi within a period of four weeks. If such an appeal is filed by petitioner against impugned rejection (Annexure P-6), then the Appellate Authority shall decide the appeal within a period of 12 weeks.

5. In the circumstances of this case, the interim order of 24 th July, 2017 will enure to the benefit of petitioner for a period of two weeks after fate of the appeal is made known to petitioner so that petitioner may avail of the remedies as available in law, if need be.

W.P.(C) No.6037/2017 Page 2of 3

6. With aforesaid directions, this petition and the application are disposed of.

                                                      (SUNIL GAUR)
                                                         JUDGE
FEBRUARY 20, 2018
mamta




W.P.(C) No.6037/2017                                            Page 3of 3