LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA Vs. S.VASANTHI
LAWS(SC)-2014-8-37
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: MADRAS)
Decided on
August 14,2014
LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA
Appellant
VERSUS
S.Vasanthi
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
RANJIT THAKUR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]OM KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ADMINISTRATOR UNION TERRITORY OF DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI VS. GULABHIA M LAD [REFERRED TO]
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KVS VS. J.HUSSAIN [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
RAM PRATAP SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-3-5] [REFERRED TO]V.K. KHULLAR VS. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-4-21] [REFERRED TO]
G. ARASUKUMAR AND ORS. VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2015-7-22] [REFERRED TO]
AMIYA KUMAR MISHRA VS. DIVISIONAL RETAIL SALES MANAGER, INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS. [LAWS(ORI)-2015-7-48] [REFERRED TO]
N KOTHANDAPANI VS. UNION OF INDIA; CHIEF COMMERCIAL MANAGER; ADDITIONAL DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER; SENIOR DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL MANAGER; CHIEF VIGILANCE OFFICER; REGISTRAR CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL [LAWS(MAD)-2016-4-417] [REFERRED]
ZAHIRUDDIN KHAN VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(PAT)-2017-5-107] [REFERRED TO]
ARUN KUMAR PRASAD VS. SINGHBHUM CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD WEST SINGHBHUM [LAWS(JHAR)-2017-4-134] [REFERRED TO]
SHIV KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS [LAWS(HPH)-2016-6-260] [REFERRED TO]
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK VS. M L BANSAL [LAWS(DLH)-2018-9-213] [REFERRED TO]
PRADEEP KUMAR GIRDHANY VS. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA & OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2018-1-473] [REFERRED TO]
KARUNA BHATTA VS. CEMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-2019-7-23] [REFERRED TO]
DIVISIONAL MANAGER LIC OF INDIA VS. RENUKA SHARMA [LAWS(DLH)-2019-12-60] [REFERRED TO]
RAVI BAJAJ VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2021-1-19] [REFERRED TO]
MURARI SARKAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2021-4-57] [REFERRED TO]
T. V. PALLANEE VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2020-12-494] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)This appeal is preferred against the final judgment and order dated June 26, 2013 in Writ Appeal No. 1279 of 2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras whereby the Division Bench of the High Court has modified the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority of appellant No.1, i.e. Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the 'LIC') on the respondent employee in a departmental enquiry.
(3.)Insofar as facts are concerned, it is sufficient to note that a charge- sheet was served upon the respondent with the allegations of tampering with the premium position and other records pertaining to 17 insurance policies, which resulted in settlement of surrender value payments, though these policies had not acquired surrender value. It was alleged in the charge- sheet that by this act of the respondent, pecuniary loss was caused to the LIC. These charges stood proved in the enquiry held against the respondent by the Enquiry Officer vide Report dated December 23, 1997. Based on the said Report, the disciplinary authority issued show-cause notice to the respondent proposing the following punishment:
(i) Recovery of loss to the Corporation of Rs.16,001.90, and
(ii) Reduction in Basic Pay to the lowest time scale (i.e.) Rs.1950/-.
(2.)This appeal is preferred against the final judgment and order dated June 26, 2013 in Writ Appeal No. 1279 of 2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras whereby the Division Bench of the High Court has modified the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority of appellant No.1, i.e. Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the 'LIC') on the respondent employee in a departmental enquiry.
(3.)Insofar as facts are concerned, it is sufficient to note that a charge- sheet was served upon the respondent with the allegations of tampering with the premium position and other records pertaining to 17 insurance policies, which resulted in settlement of surrender value payments, though these policies had not acquired surrender value. It was alleged in the charge- sheet that by this act of the respondent, pecuniary loss was caused to the LIC. These charges stood proved in the enquiry held against the respondent by the Enquiry Officer vide Report dated December 23, 1997. Based on the said Report, the disciplinary authority issued show-cause notice to the respondent proposing the following punishment:
(i) Recovery of loss to the Corporation of Rs.16,001.90, and
(ii) Reduction in Basic Pay to the lowest time scale (i.e.) Rs.1950/-.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.