Dismissed

Andhra Bank v. Donald Brian Saimon

Kerala HC11 Jun 2019WA/296/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ appeal, declining to interfere with the lower court's direction that the bank hear the respondent exclusively on the question of proportionality of punishment, specifically considering alternative penalties.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal is dismissed. Appellants directed to hear respondent exclusively on the question of proportionality of punishment.

Andhra Bank Vs Donald Brian Saimon — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 21ST JYAISHTA, 1941

¶7

W.A.No. 296 of 2017

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 24-11-2016 IN WP(C)NO.18186/2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶9

APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 ANDHRA BANK

¶11

REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, HEAD OFFICE, SAIFABAD, HYDERABAD-500004.

¶12

2 THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ANDHRA BANK, HEAD OFFICE, SAIFABAD, HYDERABAD-500004.

¶13

3 THE GENERAL MANAGER HUMAN RESOURCE DEPARTMENT (IR), ANDHRA BANK, HEAD OFFICE, SAIFABAD, HYDERABAD-500004.

¶14

4 THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT (IR), ANDHRA BANK, HEAD OFFICE, SAIFABAD, HYDERABAD-500004.

¶15

5 THE MANAGER

¶16

ANDHRA BANK, KOLLAM BRANCH, SKP BUILDINGS, BEACH ROAD, KOLLAM-691001.

¶17

BY ADVS. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SMT.ASHA BABU SRI.S.M.PRASANTH SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI

¶18

W.A.No.296 of 2017

¶19

¶20

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:

¶21

DONALD BRIAN SAIMON S/O.SIMON, DEW DROP, MARKET ROAD, THANGASSERY, KOLLAM, NOW RESIDING AT APARTMENT 23, ELLELSSLIE GARDENS, I A HARRISON ROAD, MT WILLINGDON, AUCKLAND 1060 NEWZLAND, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER T.P.JOSEPH, S/O.PETER, THAIPARAMBIL HOUSE, NO.14-1397-A, C.A.JOSEPH ROAD, THOPPUMPADY P.O., KOCHI-682006.

¶22

BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER JOSEPH

¶23

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10.06.2019, THE COURT ON 11.06.2019 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.A.No.296 of 2017

Judgment

Chitambaresh, J.

1.We agree with the learned single Judge that the proportionality of the punishment imposed on the respondent has to be revisited by the appellants in the peculiar facts and circumstances. The respondent has had 24 ½ years of service with the appellant and only 10 years of service was left for him to attain the age of superannuation. True it is that there was unauthorised absence on the part of the respondent after he submitted Ext.P1 application for voluntary retirement and Ext.P2 application for leave to the appellants. But it is the definite case of the respondent that his wife left for New Zealand to join her relatives and settle down to get over depression on account of the death of his youngest son.

¶29

2.The respondent in the circumstances also left for New Zealand to join his wife without waiting for orders on the leave applications or participating in the disciplinary proceedings initiated by the appellants. We concur with the learned single Judge that the punishment of dismissal from service imposed on the respondent by foregoing all retiral benefits is shockingly disproportionate.

¶30

W.A.No.296 of 2017

¶31

¶32

The learned single Judge has after all directed the appellants to hear the respondent 'exclusively on the question of proportionality of the punishment' which we decline to interfere. The appellants are only obliged to consider as to whether any alternative punishment without impinging on the retiral benefits for the service already rendered could be imposed.

¶33

The writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.

¶34

Sd/V. CHITAMBARESH, JUDGE

¶35

Sd/ASHOK MENON, JUDGE

¶36

Sha/100619

Andhra Bank v. Donald Brian Saimon

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Andhra Bank v. Donald Brian Saimon

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Kerala Vs Shaiju.R.

Linta Mol K.G., Vs Kerala Public Service Commission (Kpsc)

Kerala Public Service Commission Vs Chandini Chandran

The Kerala State Road Transport Vs Muraleedharan K.G.

Union of India Vs K.Lieson

Sudhakaran Erumbala, Vs Additional Divisional Railway Manager