Disposed

Ranjeet Kumar Singh v. The Central Bank Of India and Ors.

Patna HC29 Apr 2013CWJC/8561/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the respondents to conclude the pending departmental inquiry against the petitioner within eight weeks. If the inquiry concludes and the petitioner is found guilty, suspension continues; otherwise, the suspension order must be revoked, and the petitioner reinstated.

What did the court decide?

The court directed the departmental enquiry to be concluded within eight weeks. Upon failure to do so, the suspension order dated 07.01.2012 shall be revoked, and the petitioner shall be reinstated.

Ranjeet Kumar Singh Vs The Central Bank Of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8561 of 2013

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Ranjeet Kumar Singh S/O Shri Baleshwar Nath Prasad, Resident of Mohalla - Sultanpur, P.O. + P.S. Danapur, District - Patna

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The Central Bank of India, Chander Mukhi Nariman Point, Mumbai, Repesented through the Chief Manager, Central Bank of India Mourya Lok Complex, 2nd Floor, Block - B, Dak Banglow Road, Patna - 800001

¶7

The Chief Manager, Central Bank of India Mourya Lok Complex, 2nd Floor, Block - B, Dak Banglow Road, Patna - 800001

¶8

The Branch Manager, Central Bank of India, Rajbansi Nagar Branch, Rajbanshi Nagar, Patna

¶9

The Assistant Branch Manager, Central Bank of India, Rajbanshi Nagar Branch, Rajbansi Nagar, Patna

¶10

The Disciplinary Authority - Cum - Chief Manager, Central Bank of India Mourya Lok Complex, 2nd Floor, Block - B, Dak Banglow Road, Patna - 800001

¶11

Shri Manoranjan Kumar Sinha S/O not Known to this Petitioner, the Enquiry Officer of the Departmental Proceeding, Sr. Manager N.B.O.Office Central Bank of India, Fraser Road, Patna - 800001

¶12

Shri Mohit Kodani, Assistant General Manager, Central Bank Of India Mourya Lok Complex, 2nd Floor, Block - B, Dak Banglow Road, Patna - 800001

¶13

.... .... Respondent/s

¶14

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sriprakash Srivastava For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha

¶15

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶16

2 29-04-2013 Heard the parties.

¶17

The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the validity and correctness of order dated 07.01.2012 (Annexure-2) issued by the respondent Assistant General Manager, Central Bank of India, whereby the petitioner has been put under suspension under relevant rules of the Bank w.e.f. 04.01.2012 in view of his remand to judicial custody in connection with a criminal case.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.8561 of 2013 (2) dt.29-04-2013

¶20

2/3

¶21

petitioner is under suspension w.e.f. 04.01.2012 and though he has already been granted bail in connection with the criminal case as far back as on 19.03.2012, yet despite passage of more than one year, neither the disciplinary proceeding has been concluded nor the order of suspension has been revoked. He further submits that on the ground of inordinate delay the impugned order of suspension is fit to be revoked and the petitioner is entitled to be reinstated in service.

¶22

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has opposed the prayer and has submitted that the petitioner was arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation on 04.01.2012 in a trap case, while he was found taking bribe. It is further submitted that after the order of suspension, the departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner. Memo of charge was served upon him. He filed his written statement of defence and he was allowed to participate in the aforesaid departmental enquiry. It is also pointed out on behalf of the respondents that Disciplinary Authority not being satisfied with the enquiry report directed for further enquiry in which also the petitioner participated and, accordingly, further enquiry report has been submitted, wherein all the charges framed against the petitioner have been found to have been proved. However, he has fairly conceded that no final order has been passed by the Disciplinary/ Appointing Authority with respect to the aforesaid departmental enquiry initiated against the petitioner. It is contended that if the petitioner cooperates, then the departmental enquiry initiated against him, shall be taken to its logical conclusion within a maximum period of eight weeks.

¶23

After having heard the parties and taking into consideration the entire materials including the fact that enquiry

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.8561 of 2013 (2) dt.29-04-2013

¶25

3/3

¶26

report has been submitted holding the petitioner guilty for the charges of misconduct, this Court directs that the departmental enquiry initiated against the petitioner must be concluded within a maximum period of eight weeks from today. If the second show cause is issued to the petitioner, he shall be obliged to file his show cause within the time prescribed. Despite filing of second show cause by the petitioner within the time prescribed, if the departmental enquiry against the petitioner is not finally concluded within the aforesaid period of eight weeks, then the impugned order of suspension dated 07.01.2012 (Annexure-2) shall stand revoked and the petitioner shall be reinstated in service.

¶27

The writ petition stands finally disposed of with the observations and directions made above.

¶28

(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

¶29

BTiwary/-

Ranjeet Kumar Singh v. The Central Bank Of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet Kumar Singh v. The Central Bank Of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jitendra Kumar Yadav Vs The Food Corporation Of India and Ors.

Vinod Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sanjay Ram Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Deep Narayan Jaiswal Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Raj Kishore Upadhya and Anr. Vs The Administrator Bihar State Road Transport Cor.and Ors.

Braj Kishore Jha and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.