Prafulla Kumar Sarangi vs Union Bank Of India And Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 2999 Ori

Orissa High Court

Prafulla Kumar Sarangi vs Union Bank Of India And Others on 28 January, 2025

Bench: Arindam Sinha, M.S. Sahoo

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                WA No.2942 of 2024

         Prafulla Kumar Sarangi                  ....             Appellant

                                               Represented By Adv. -
                                         Mrs. Soma Patnaik, Advocate


                                      -versus-

         Union Bank of India and others          ....          Respondents
                                                   Represented By Adv. -




                              CORAM:
                THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,
                            ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
                                        AND
                   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO


                                       ORDER

28.01.2025

Order No.

01. 1. Mrs. Patnaik, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant

and submits, her client was petitioner in the writ petition dismissed by

impugned judgment dated 24th July, 2024 made by the learned single

Judge. Petitioner had challenged conduct of the inquiry proceeding

culminating in imposition of major penalty. On query made she

submits, charge was allegation that her client did not follow laid down

// 2 //

guidelines of the bank in sanction/conduct/monetary of two loan

accounts, which became Non Performing Assets (NPA). Major penalty

of reduction of pay by four stages for two years with further direction

that her client will not earn increments during rigor period and further

effect of postponing her future increments were handed out. The

learned Judge erred in facts and law. The appeal was presented in

time.

2. We see from paragraph-18 of the judgment, the learned single

Judge considered the penalty as cannot be viewed to be a response to a

single isolated incident. The passage from said paragraph is

reproduced below.

" xxx xxx The petitioner had committed irregularities in the sanctioning of loans and compliance issues, for which he had received multiple warnings and minor penalties. Consequently, this penalty cannot be viewed as a response to a single isolated incident. It is, in fact, a culmination of repeated noncompliance and misconduct, reflecting a pattern of behavior that warranted a more severe penalty."

// 3 //

3. Issue notice along with this order on respondent nos. 2 and 3 by

registered/speed post with AD. Appellant will put in requisites.

4. Mrs. Patnaik submits, there is a typographical error in page-2 in

the cause title. She has leave to make the correction in Court, to be

counter signed by Court Master. Service is to be effected on the

corrected copy.

5. List on 18th February, 2025.

(Arindam Sinha) Acting Chief Justice

(M.S. Sahoo) Judge Sks