Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

High Court Upholds Disciplinary Action Against Bank Officer for Deviations in Banking Practices

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court at Calcutta, in a significant judgment, upheld the disciplinary action taken against Nachiketa Sengupta, a former Scale-II officer at Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank. Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, presiding over the case, dismissed the writ petition filed by Sengupta, challenging the charge-sheet and subsequent disciplinary actions, including his dismissal from service.

In his detailed judgment, Justice Chatterjee observed, “The petitioner had admitted that he could not complete some of the ‘housekeeping works which might cause deviation of some Banking practices’ and apologized for the same.” This acknowledgment by the officer was pivotal in affirming the disciplinary measures taken by the bank.

The case (WPA 24355 of 2015), which was heard on August 28th, 2023, and decided on November 20th, centered around the legality and propriety of a charge-sheet issued against Sengupta in 2013, following allegations of misconduct in his capacity as Branch Manager. The court meticulously examined the procedures followed by the bank and the responses of the petitioner, who was accused of sanctioning and disbursing loans in violation of established norms and policies.

Justice Chatterjee noted, “It is well-known proposition of law that in case of a disciplinary proceeding, the scope of judicial review shall be restricted to the decision-making process.” The court’s decision hinged on the adherence to procedural norms and the lack of prejudice caused to the petitioner due to any alleged procedural lapses.

Significantly, the judgment also addressed the issue of the ‘Competent Authority’ in initiating disciplinary proceedings. The court clarified that the General Manager of the bank, who issued the charge-sheet, had become the ‘Competent Authority’ for Scale-II officers like the petitioner after an amendment to the service regulations. This legal clarity resolved a crucial aspect of the petitioner’s argument.

The dismissal of the writ petition reaffirms the principles of accountability and integrity in the banking sector. It serves as a precedent in matters of disciplinary proceedings and the adherence to internal regulations and policies within financial institutions.

Date of Decision: 20th November 2023

Nachiketa Sengupta -Vs.- Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank & Ors.

Latest Legal News