Patna High Court
Priyanka Kumari vs State Bank Of India on 11 January, 2024
Author: Anshuman
Bench: Anshuman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1978 of 2020
======================================================
Priyanka Kumari Wife of Gunjan Prabhakar, Previously residing at Uttar
Harishchandrapur, Police Station Harishchandrapur Malada, West Bengal at
present working as Senior Associate, Administrative Office, State Bank of
India, Purnea.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. State Bank of India through its Chairman, Central Office, State Bank of
India, State Bank Bhavan, Madame Cama Road, Mumbai.
2. The Chief General Manager, 7th Floor, Local Head Office, State Bank of
India, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna.
3. The Dy. General Manager, State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Purnea.
4. The Assistant General Manager-cum-Disciplinary Authority (Region-III),
State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Purnea.
5. Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Regional Business Office-1, Purnea.
6. The Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Branch Office, Purnea.
7. The Branch Head, State Bank of India, Branch Office, Purnea.
8. Anand Kumar Mishra, the then Chief Manager, S.B.I. Purnea Branch,
Purnea.
9. Internal Complaint Committee, RBO, Purnea through its Chairperson.
10. The Chairperson, Internal Complaint Comittee, RBO, Purnea.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Verma, Advocate
Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kaushlendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent Bank: Mrs. Namrata Mishra, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 11-01-2024
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the respondent/Bank and learned counsel for the
State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CWJC No.1978 of 2020 dt.11-01-2024
2/8
the present writ petition has been filed demanding relief by way
of setting aside the decision of the respondents to initiate the
disciplinary action against the petitioner, quashing the charge
sheet dated 31.10.2019 framed in reference to the outcome of
the Internal Complaint Committee within the Bank constituted
to hear the petitioner's complaint and further to declare the said
action that petitioner's absence is illegal. The further prayer has
also been made that taking proceeding on the complaint of
petitioner as before Internal Complaint Committee constituted
de hors the Rules be declared as bad and, therefore, subsequent
action pursuant to the finding of the Internal Complaint
Committee be declared nonest in the law with other reliefs.
Counsel further submits that by way of I.A. No.1 of 2023, the
prayer of challenging the charge sheets dated 24.01.2020 and
enquiry report dated 21.04.2020 were also challenged after
allowing the said I.A. vide order dated 24.11.2023. Counsel
further submits that the respondent has filed supplementary
counter affidavit by which it transpires to the petitioner that
final order has been passed in that disciplinary proceeding
against him and it is due to this reason the petitioner has filed
the present I.A. No.2 of 2023 challenging the final order passed
by the disciplinary authority before this Court, primarily, on the
Patna High Court CWJC No.1978 of 2020 dt.11-01-2024
3/8
ground that the said final order has been passed in gross
violation of natural justice without granting any opportunity to
the petitioner to defend. Therefore, he submits that the prayer
made in paragraphs-8 and 10 of the I.A. petition as well as the
grounds mentioned in paragraph-9 of the said I.A. may be
allowed and the prayers and the grounds may be treated as part
and parcel of the writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the State Bank of India,
on the other hand, vehemently opposes the prayer of the
petitioner and submits that from the original prayer it transpires
that petitioner has demanded prayer of quashing the decision of
the Internal Complaint Committee formed under the Sexual
Harassment of Woman at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition
and Redressal) Act, 2013, and subsequently the charge sheet
issued to the petitioner in the year 2019 by way of addition of
prayer by I.A. No.1 of 2023 challenging the second charge sheet
issued in the month of January, 2020 as well as the enquiry
report issued in the month of April, 2020.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent-Bank
further submits that final order has already been passed by the
disciplinary authority, which is an appealable order vide order as
per Rule 521(12) of Sastry Award and paragraph-14 of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.1978 of 2020 dt.11-01-2024
4/8
memorandum of settlement dated 10.04.2002. Counsel further
submits that the decision of Internal Complaint Committee is
challengeable before Labour Tribunal according to Section 18
of the Sexual Harassment of Woman at Workplace
(Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, but the
petitioner has not preferred to challenge it anywhere and,
therefore, it acquires finality.
5. Learned counsel for the Bank further submits
that in paragraph-6 of the supplementary counter affidavit, it has
been specifically stated that earlier charge sheet issued vide
memorandum reference dated 31.10.2019 has not been
abandoned and fresh charge sheet vide memorandum No.67
dated 24.01.2020 has been issued in which two additional
charges have also been incorporated. Counsel submits that the
petitioner was communicated about the date of enquiry
proceeding through registered post and special messenger at her
recorded address before every hearing which has been accepted
by the parents, the notice dated 25.02.2020 and remaining letters
were not received by them, as such, registered post returned
undelivered. It has also been mentioned that the enquiry officer
sent mails and SMS on her registered mobile number, but
petitioner made no communication. On 06.04.2020, the enquiry
Patna High Court CWJC No.1978 of 2020 dt.11-01-2024
5/8
officer sent whatsapp message and text message to the petitioner
for personal enquiry and through video/voice calls on
08.04.2020
. The petitioner replied through Whatsapp that she
had not received any letter for her appearance in the enquiry
proceeding. Thereupon, the Enquiry Officer decided to provide
another opportunity for being heard and sent letter on
13.04.2020 on her recorded address along with entire
proceeding details. It has been stated that the petitioner has
accepted all letters from the Bank's messenger, but refused to
give acknowledgment and after much persuasion petitioner's
mother gave acknowledgment. The petitioner has sent her reply
from her mobile No.8637874913 on whats-app No.9771475125
of the Enquiry Officer. Thereafter, inquiry was completed on
18.04.2020. It has been submitted that the petitioner deliberately
evaded participation in the Enquiry Proceeding. Counsel further
submits that the enquiry was conducted and enquiry officer has
submitted its report on 21.04.2020 to the disciplinary authority
and the disciplinary authority forwarded a copy of the inquiry
report to the petitioner vide letter No.125 dated 06.05.2020
asking for her submissions.
6. Learned counsel for the Bank further stated
that opportunity of personal hearing /submissions on quantum of
Patna High Court CWJC No.1978 of 2020 dt.11-01-2024
punishment was also accorded to the petitioner by the
Disciplinary Authority vide order No.218 dated 16.05.2020,
letter No.309A dated 26.05.2020, letter No.433 dated
11.06.2020, letter No.494 dated 20.06.2020 and letter No.61
dated 01.07.2020. But the petitioner did not submit her
submission on the notices either on one pretext or other.
Thereafter, the disciplinary authority has no option but to pass
order of punishment following due process on 14.07.2020 and
communicated to the petitioner vide letter No.65 dated
14.07.2020. Counsel further submits that it is very much
relevant to mention that the petitioner thereafter submitted a
request letter on 05.10.2020, which was received in Bank on
20.10.2020 requesting sanction of leave for the period (i) Sick
leave upto February, 2020; (ii) Special sick leave upto
16.06.2020 and (iii) maternity leave upto 16.12.2020. The
controller of the petitioner subsequently sanctioned the privilege
leave from 01.03.2020 to 20.03.2020; Special sick leave (Covid-
19) from 21.03.2020 to 16.06.2020 and Maternity leave from
17.06.2020 to 16.12.2020 in the month of November, 2020.
Counsel submits that the defence taken by the counsel for the
petitioner that there is violation of natural justice is not correct
and may not be accepted. In the conclusive argument counsel
Patna High Court CWJC No.1978 of 2020 dt.11-01-2024
for the Bank reiterated that once final order has been passed
then the only opportunity left to the petitioner to avail the
remedy of appeal and, as such, counsel submits that I.A. No.2 of
2023 may not be allowed.
7. Counsel for the petitioner is relying on
judgment of M/S. Radha Krishna Industries Vs. State of
Himanchal Pradesh and Others passed in Civil Appeal
No.1155 of 2021 (arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.1688 of 2021
reported in (2021) 6 SCC 771 and in the case of Prem Ranjan
Kumar Vs. State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary,
Co-operative Department and Others reported in 2021(C)
PLJR 364, by virtue of those judgments he submits that
wherever there is a violation of natural justice then the writ
Court ought to entertain the petition directly and there is no
need to follow the established procedure of law to prefer appeal.
8. After going through the pleadings, documents
and those judgments, this Court is of the firm view that in the
light of the pleadings made in paragraph-6 of the supplementary
counter affidavit, it transpires to this Court that the present case
is absolutely not comes within the purview of violation of
principle of natural justice. As such, it is directed to the
petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal and, hence, this writ
Patna High Court CWJC No.1978 of 2020 dt.11-01-2024
petition is dismissed with liberty that the petitioner shall prefer
appeal. The appellate authority is directed to condone the delay
if there is any delay in filing the appeal.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Mkr./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 16.01.2024
Transmission Date NA
