B.R.SHARMA Vs. SYNDICATE BANK & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was served with a charge-sheet by the first respondent bank. The gravamen of the charge was while working in the Junior Management Cadre Scale-I, on October 25, 1978, along with 25 odd employees of the bank the appellant unauthorizedly assembled inside the premises of the Zonal Office, near the room of the Deputy General Manager, and with few others, the appellant forcibly entered the room of the Deputy General Manager and indulged in disorderly behaviour. The Deputy General Manager was threatened with violence and was prevented from leaving his room. Police had to be summoned to escort the Deputy General Manager to safety and at that time shouting slogans, intending to physically assault the Deputy General Manager, the appellant rushed towards the car in which the Deputy General Manager was being taken under police escort. The appellant abused the Deputy General Manager.

(2.) The charge-sheet terminated in an order dated August 23, 1998 being passed, levying penalty of compulsorily retirement upon the appellant. It was followed by an order dated October 23, 1998 forfeiting the gratuity payable to the appellant.

(3.) Vide order dated November 15, 2001 the controlling authority under the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 struck down the order dated October 23, 1998, on the ground that the appellant was denied an opportunity of hearing by the competent authority. It was directed that the appellant shall be paid gratuity. Appeal filed by the respondent bank was rejected by the appellate authority vide order dated May 06, 2002 and the respondent bank proceeded to this Court by way of WP(C) No.3994/2002, which was disposed of vide order dated February 03, 2005. Noting that the victory of the appellant was on account of a procedural violation, the learned Single Judge directed that the competent authority should hear the appellant and pass an order afresh. Accordingly, on May 05, 2005 the competent authority served a notice upon the appellant, granting opportunity to be heard on the subject as to why gratuity be not forfeited. The appellant submitted a response and was heard. Vide order dated May 09, 2005 the competent authority, giving reasons, withheld the gratuity payable. The order highlights that the appellant had suffered the penalty on the misconduct of a riotous behaviour. Regulation 46(1)(e) of the Syndicate Bank Officers' Regulation 1979 was noted by the competent authority as also the language of Section 4(6)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.