Decided on January 18,2016

D.R.P. Sundharam Respondents


- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) The respondent - writ petitioner while serving as Assistant General Manager of the Canara Bank superannuated on 31st May, 2007. After his retirement, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him by a charge-memo dated 28th June, 2007. Prior to the above, he was placed under suspension on 23rd November, 2006 and as it appears from the materials on record there were correspondences exchanged by and between the Authorities of the Bank with regard to the initiation of a disciplinary proceeding against the respondent-writ petitioner. However, nothing appears to have come out of the said exercise and the respondent - writ petitioner superannuated, as noticed above, whereafter a charge-sheet was served upon him. Aggrieved by the departmental proceeding initiated, the respondent - writ petitioner moved the High Court of Madras under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The learned single judge hearing the writ petition allowed the same and quashed the proceedings initiated against the respondent - writ petitioner. The said order was affirmed in the Writ Appeal filed by the Bank. Aggrieved, the present appeal in question has been lodged before this Court by the Bank upon grant of leave under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) The High Court while deciding the matter appears to have relied upon two judgments of this Court in UCO Bank & Anr. v. Rajinder Lal Capoor, 2007 3 SCT 529 and in UCO Bank & Anr. v. Rajinder Lal Capoor, 2008 3 SCT 371. The Bench hearing the petition for leave to appeal upon due consideration seems to have doubted the correctness of the views expressed in the said decisions of the coordinate Bench and accordingly by order dated 4th August, 2010 made a reference to a larger Bench. It is pursuant thereto that the matter has been placed before us for consideration.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.