Canara Bank Officers and Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976 – Regulations 4(h), 5(3) – Respondent was working as Scale I officer with the appellant-bank – Put under suspension for misconduct by the Deputy General Manager of the Bank – Order passed inflicting the punishment of compulsory retirement – Respondent’s appeal dismissed by the Appellate Authority – Challenged by the respondent before the High Court – Meanwhile, review of the respondent also rejected – Single Judge remitted the matter to the Appellate Authority for reconsideration concluding that the General Manager of the Bank was justified in passing the order in view of Regulation 5(3) – Division Bench set aside the order on the ground that the General Manager being an authority higher to Disciplinary Authority cannot exercise the power of the Disciplinary Authority and remitted the matter to the Deputy General Manager – On appeal, held: It is clear from the Regulation 5(3) that the Disciplinary Authority or any other authority higher than it, may impose any penalties specified in Regulation 4 on any officer employee – In the instant case, the departmental proceedings against the respondent were initiated by the Deputy General Manager being the Disciplinary Authority – But the order of punishment was passed by the General Manager, who was higher than the Disciplinary Authority – Having regard to Regulation 5(3), Division Bench not justified in holding that General manager has no authority to pass the order of punishment – Order of the Division Bench set aside and that of the Single Judge, restored. Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD : 1. It is clear from the Regulation 5(3), Canara Bank Officers and Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976 that the Disciplinary Authority or any other authority higher than it, may impose any penalties specified in Regulation 4 on any officer employee. In the instant case, the departmental proceedings against the respondent were initiated by the Deputy General Manager being the Disciplinary Authority. But the order of punishment has been passed by the General Manager, who was higher than the Disciplinary Authority. Having regard to Regulation 5(3), the Division Bench was not justified in holding that General manager has no authority to pass the order of punishment. The order of the Division Bench is set aside and the order of the Single Judge remitting the matter to the authorised Appellate Authority for reconsideration of the appeal is restored. [Paras 13, 14] [40-E-G]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.