9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 656X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the court must lean in favour of an interpretation which has been applied by this Court in Workmen of M/s. Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co. of India (P) Ltd. v. Management and Others [1973 (3) TMI 134 - SUPREME COURT] wherein held that Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act must be interpreted in the light of the legal principles operating in the field. Thus it is not a fit case where we should exercise our jurisdiction. W.P. dismissed. - REVIEW PETITION (C) NO. 748 OF 2007 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2739 OF 2007 - - - Dated:- 31-3-2008 - S.B. Sinha Markandey Katju, JJ. ORDER S.B. SINHA, J : 1. Review Petitioners herein have filed this application for review of this Court s judgment and order dated 18.05.2007 passed in Civil Appeal No. 2739 of 2007. 2. Respondent was working with the appellant Bank. Almost immediately prior to his retirement, he was asked to show cause as to why action under the UCO Bank (Officers ) Service Regulations, 1979 (for short the 1979 Regulations ) should not be taken against him by notices dated 24.10.1996 and 30.10.1996. 3. Respondent reached his age of superannuation on 30.11.1996. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalties. Subregulation (1) of Regulation 6 provides that no proceeding for imposing major penalties shall be initiated except after an inquiry is held in accordance with the provisions thereof. Sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 6 provides that when the disciplinary authority is of the opinion that there were grounds for inquiring into the truth of any imputation of misconduct, an inquiry officer is to be appointed. Sub-Regulations (3), (4) and (5) of Regulation 6 read as under: (3) Where it is proposed to hold an inquiry, the Disciplinary Authority shall frame definite and distinct charges on the basis of the allegations against the officer employee and the articles of charge, together with a statement of the allegations, on which they are based, shall be communicated in writing to the officer employee, who shall be required to submit within such time as may be specified by the Disciplinary Authority (not exceeding 15 days) or within such extended time as may be granted by the said Authority, a written statement of his defence. (4) On receipt of the written statement of the officer employee, or if no such statement is received within th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prejudicial to interests of the Bank, and where it is not possible or expedient to proceed against him as per the disciplinary procedure, the Bank may terminate his services on giving him three months notice or emoluments in lieu thereof in accordance with the guidance issued by the Government from time to time. (b) Order of termination under this subregulation shall not be made unless such officer has been given a reasonable opportunity of making a representation to the Bank against the proposed order. (c) The decision to terminate the services of an officer employee under sub-regulation (a) above will be taken only by the Chairman and Managing Director. (d) The officer employee shall be entitled to appeal against any order passed under subregulation (a) above by preferring an appeal within 15 days to the Board of Directors of the Bank. If the appeal is allowed, the order under subregulation (a) shall stand cancelled. (e) Where an officer employee whose services have been terminated and who has been paid an amount of three months emoluments in lieu of notice and on appeal his termination is cancelled, the amount paid to him in li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -regulation (1) of Regulation 20 of the 1979 Regulations, thus, deals with termination of service where the performance of an officer is unsatisfactory or inadequate or where there is a bona fide suspicion about his integrity or where his retention in the bank s service is prejudicial to interests of the disciplinary procedure. Other Sub-regulations of Regulation 20 provides for the mode and manner in which such termination may be effected as also his entitlement to prefer an appeal thereagainst and other benefits to which he would be otherwise entitled to. 14. Sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 20 of the 1979 Regulations places an embargo on an official to leave or discontinue his service of the bank without giving a notice in writing. It prescribes a period of notice. Subregulation (3) of Regulation 20, however, places an embargo on an officer to leave or discontinue or resign from service without the prior approval in writing of the competent authority and a notice or resignation given by such an officer before or during the disciplinary proceedings shall not take effect unless it is accepted by the competent authority. Clause (ii) of Sub-regulation (3) of Regulation 20 must ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the disciplinary authority to initiate a proceeding and not for any other purpose. 18. If it is found that a disciplinary proceeding can be and should be initiated, recourse to the 1976 Regulations would have to be taken, if not, the 1979 Regulations may be resorted to if the conditions precedent therefor are satisfied. It is only with a view to put an embargo on the officer to leave his job, Clause (ii) of Sub-Regulation (3) of Regulation 20 of the 1979 Regulations has been made. It s scope is limited. 19. We have noticed hereinbefore that each regulations operates in different fields. When a proceeding is initiated for the purpose of taking any disciplinary action on the ground of any misconduct which might have been committed by the officer concerned indisputably the procedures laid down in the 1976 Regulations are required to be resorted to. 20. The 1979 Regulations would be attracted only for the purpose of termination of service. Had the intention of the regulation making authority been that the legal fiction created under Clause (ii) of Sub-regulation (3) of Regulation 20 would cover both Clauses (i) and (iii), the same should have been placed only after Clause (iii ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , if given, may give rise to an anomaly or absurdity which must be avoided. So as to enable a superior court to interpret a statute in a reasonable manner, the court must place itself in the chair of a reasonable legislator/ author. So done, the rules of purposive construction have to be resorted to which would require the construction of the Act in such a manner so as to see that the object of the Act fulfilled; which in turn would lead the beneficiary under the statutory scheme to fulfill its constitutional obligations as held by the court inter alia in Ashoka Marketing Ltd (supra). 51. Barak in his exhaustive work on Purposive Construction explains various meanings attributed to the term purpose . It would be in the fitness of discussion to refer to Purposive Construction in Barak s words: Hart and Sachs also appear to treat purpose as a subjective concept. I say appear because, although Hart and Sachs claim that the interpreter should imagine himself or herself in the legislator s shoes, they introduce two elements of objectivity: First, the interpreter should assume that the legislature is composed of reasonable people seeking to achieve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of superannuation must be a statutory rule. A fortiori it must be a rule applicable to a disciplinary proceedings. 23. There cannot be any doubt whatsoever that the employer may take resort to a preliminary inquiry, but it will bear repetition to state that the same has a limited role to play. But, in absence of the statutory rules operating in the field, resorting to a preliminary enquiry would not by itself be enough to hold that a departmental proceeding has been initiated. 24. Initiation of a disciplinary proceeding may lead to an evil or civil consequence. Thus, in absence of clear words, the court must lean in favour of an interpretation which has been applied by this Court in the main judgment. In Workmen of M/s. Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co. of India (P) Ltd. v. Management and Others [(1973) 1 SCC 813], this Court held that Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act must be interpreted in the light of the legal principles operating in the field. [See also Haryana Urban Development Authority v. Om Pal (2007) 5 SCC 742] 25. For the reasons aforementioned, we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case where we should exercise our jurisdiction. 26. This petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
