Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1365 (PAT)

Raj Kumar Raut son of late Niwas Raut v. Punjab National Bank through its Executive Director / Reviewing Authority, Human Resources Management Division, Head Office, Bhikaji Kama Plance, New Delhi

2018-08-27

SHIVAJI PANDEY

body2018
JUDGMENT : Heard the parties. 1. In the present writ petition, petitioner is challenging the order dated 18.02.2015 (Annexure – 5) passed by Deputy General Manager-cum-Disciplinary Authority by which major punishment for “Removal from service which shall not be disqualification for future employment” under Regulations 4 (i) of Punjab National Bank Officer Employees’ (D&A) Regulations, 1977 has been imposed. 2. All together six charges were leveled against the petitioner, chargesheet was served upon him to file explanation and later on he was proceeded departmentally. Enquiry Officer has found that all charges were proved except charge no.3 and ultimately disciplinary authority has passed the aforesaid order. The same was challenged before the Appellate Authority who has confirmed the order of the Disciplinary Authority. Thereafter, review petitioner was also filed by the petitioner unsuccessfully. The order of the Appellate Authority consists three pages but on merit four line consideration thereby affirmed the order of punishment passed by the Disciplinary Authority without taking into consideration the plea taken by the petitioner raised in appeal. 3. The appeal is continuation of trial and Appellate Authority is supposed to pass a reasoned order as reason is living link between the decision maker and decision. In failure to record a reason the order is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Reference can be made to the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chairman and Managing Director, United Commercial Bank and others v. P.C. Kakkar, reported in (2003) 4 SCC 364 , Para-15. 4. Same mistake has been committed by the Reviewing Authority he has also not considered any of the explanation submitted by the petitioner and passed a cryptic order. 5. In such circumstances, both the orders passed by the Appellate Authority and Executive Director, dated 18.02.2015 and 28.02.2017 respectively are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Appellate Authority at the stage of appeal, who will consider the ground raised by the petitioner and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed.