9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ically examined and wriggled out himself of the tight corner by pleading 'no disease'. The petitioner furnished a false information and claimed bills contrary to service rules for which penalty of removal from service was imposed upon him. The petitioner was working in a Nationalized Bank, where the required standard of integrity and honesty is very high. Therefore, the petitioner was expected to act and discharge his duties in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Bank. Acting beyond one's authority is by itself a breach of discipline and trust and a misconduct. No interference with the decision of the respondent as it does not shock the conscience of this Court. - W.P.(C) No.8342/2010 - - - Dated:- 6-12-2012 - Suresh Kait, J. JUDGMENT 1. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 15.05.2010, whereby he was removed from services. The present petition is the second round of litigation. Initially, the petitioner filed a petition being W.P.(C) No. 4901/1993. The same was disposed of vide order dated 22.09.2009, whereby the Court has held as under:- "32. In conclusion, since in the finding of the Inquiring Authority on thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umber of bills for self and members of his family for substantial amount from Dr.P.K. Sukhbeti of Dehradun, when asked to appear before a Medical Board he submitted that he had no disease. He has thus claimed reimbursement in respect of bills most of which have been bogus. A few such instances are given in Annexure B‟, the list i.e. illustrative and not exhaustive." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to the order of the Disciplinary Authority, wherein it has been stated as under:- "I have perused the enquiry proceedings and all evidence produced therein. I concur with the findings of Inquiring Authority except to part of this charge No.3 4 wherein the Inquiring Authority found the charged office guilty of claiming fictitious and bogus medical bills. The Inquiring Authority has concluded that the Homeopathic medicines can only be taken after discontinuing Ayurvedic and Allopathic medicines, as such the claim for reimbursement of medical bills for all the three systems of treatment is not in order." 4. The above said Authority has further stated as under:- "I have fully gone into the facts of the case. After applying my mind indep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected to consider the proportionality of the punishment and to pass the appropriate order regarding nature of punishment to be imposed upon the petitioner. 8. He further submitted that intention of the Court was that the Appellate Authority would consider the case of the petitioner on proportionality of the punishment but certainly less than the removal from service. 9. However, the Appellate Authority was adamant to pass the same order by ignoring the direction passed by this Court. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon B.C.Chaturvedi Vs. Union of India and Ors., AIR 1996 SC 484, wherein the Supreme Court has observed as follows: "Hansaria, J. (Concurring):- 21. I am in respectful agreement with all the conclusions reached by learned brother Ramaswamy, J. This concurring note is to express my view on two facets the case. The first of these relates to the power of the High Court to do "complete justice", which power has been invoked in some cases by this Court to alter the punishment/penalty where the one awarded has been regarded as disproportionate, but denied to the High Courts. No doubt, Article 142 of the Constitution has specifically conferred the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Rule 49. 13. The imputation against the petitioner was that he had claimed reimbursement, contrary to the Rules. A list of medicines, provided by the petitioner, shows details on which simultaneous treatment under different streams of medicine was taken by the petitioner and his family members. It shows that he claimed bills for simultaneous treatment for overlapping periods under Allopathic and Ayurvedic medicines on four-five occasions. Further, he claimed simultaneous treatment bills under Allopathic, Ayurvedic and Homeopathic medicines for his wife/children on nine or more occasions. Dr. S.K.Gupta, Medical Officer, Govt. Ayurvedic Dispensary, Hertbertpur, Dehradun, who was the prosecution witness No. 4 in the enquiry, categorically stated that Ayurvedic medicines could not be taken simultaneously with Allopathic and Homeopathic treatment. Therefore, the petitioner is liable for lapse. He cleverly exploited the Sanskritised names of Ayurvedic diseases to fox the scrutinizing/paying officials and got away with it. This proves his doubtful integrity. He had been regularly claiming bills for some of the chronic diseases from 1982 to 1988. When he was asked to appear before t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... honesty and integrity are inbuilt requirements of functioning, it would not be proper to deal with the matter leniently. Misconduct, in such cases has to be dealt with iron hands." 17. In the case of The Managing Director State Bank of Hyderabad Vs. P. Kata Rao, (2008) 15 SCC 657@662, it has been held as under:- " There cannot be any doubt whatsoever that the jurisdiction of superior courts in interfering with a finding of fact arrived at by the Enquiry Officer is limited. The High Court, it is trite, would also ordinarily not interfere with the quantum of punishment." 18. Learned counsel for the respondent has further submitted that this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has power for a judicial review and if the conscious of the Court is shocked with the proportionality of the punishment, then the decision of the respondent can be altered. He has relied upon a case of State of U.P. Vs. Sheo Shankar Lal Srivastava (2006) 3 SCC 276 @ 285, wherein it has been held as under:- " It is now well-settled that principles of law that the High Court or the Tribunal in exercise of its power of judicial review would not normally interfere with the quantum of punish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... do nothing which is unbecoming of a Bank officer. Good conduct and discipline are inseparable from the functioning of every officer/employee of the Bank." 23. On the issue of pension, the learned counsel for the respondent has relied upon a case of V. Kasturi Vs. Managing Director, State Bank of India, Bombay Anr., (1998) 8 SCC 30@40, wherein it has been held as under:- W.P.(C) No.8342/2010 Page 11 of 15 "Consequently occasion for an employee who is a member of the fund to make a request in writing to the Bank for getting the benefit of pension scheme as per Rule 22(1)(c) as amended would arise provided such an employee has completed 20 years of pensionable service and has obtained the right under the amended sub-clause (c) of Rule 22(1) to make his request in writing. Meaning thereby those employees like the appellant who had ceased to be members prior to the said date and who might have completed 20 years of service in past will not be able to invoke the amended Clause (c) Rule 22(1) at any time after their earlier retirement. 24. On the issue of false claim, the learned counsel for the respondent has relied upon a case of Charanjit Lamba Vs. Commanding Officer, Army Sout ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... place of posting involving a large number of bills. In charge No.4, it is alleged that the appellant claimed reimbursement for 52 diseases, but refused to appear before the Medical Board saying that he had no disease. This establishes his malafide intention for claiming bills for non-existing diseases and amounts to misusing the Bank's medical facilities with a view to make profit out of it. This confirms the dishonest intention of the petitioner for wrongful enrichment which warrants the punishment of removal from service. Accordingly, the punishment of removal from service has been maintained. 28. The settled law is that the courts should interfere only when the punishment / penalty awarded shocks the judicial conscience. The decision of the administrator must have been within the four corners of the law and not one, which no sensible person could have reasonably arrived at, having regard to the above principles, and must have been a bona fide one. The test is to see whether there is any infirmity in the decision-making process and not in the decision itself. If the charged employee held the position of trust where honesty and integrity are inbuilt requirement of functioning, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
