Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |    

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.

Similar News