Summary
The Supreme Court allowed the bank’s appeal and restored the dismissed employee’s writ petition for a fresh decision by the Single Judge. The Single Judge had rejected one of three disciplinary charges and set aside dismissal without examining the other two charges found proved in the enquiry. The Division Bench compounded the error by sending the matter to the disciplinary authority. Both High Court orders were set aside; the merits of all charges remained for determination in the writ petition.
Issues
- Whether the High Court could set aside dismissal and remit the disciplinary matter after examining only one of three charges.
- Which forum should decide the unresolved challenge to the disciplinary action.
Held
- The enquiry had found all three charges proved. Having examined only charge 2, the Single Judge was required also to examine charges 1 and 3 independently and record findings in accordance with law, rather than set aside dismissal and remit the matter without addressing them. (¶¶ 3, 6, 12, 13, 14)
- The Division Bench should have corrected the incomplete examination by remitting the writ petition to the Single Judge. Sending it to the disciplinary authority was unjustified on these facts. (¶¶ 15, 16)
- Both High Court orders were set aside and the employee’s writ petition restored. The Single Judge was to decide it on merits uninfluenced by the earlier observations, including those of this Court, preferably within six months. The connected employee appeals were disposed of in view of that order. (¶¶ 17, 18, 19)
Result
Bank’s appeal allowed; Single Judge and Division Bench orders set aside; employee’s writ petition restored for fresh merits determination, preferably within six months. Connected employee appeals disposed of.