RAJENDER SINGH Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM No. 4431-4432/2013 For the reasons stated in the applications, the same are allowed. W.P.(C) 7414/2010

(2.) Brief facts that are relevant for examining the controversy in the present petition are as under:-

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Tribunal had failed to consider the facts in its totality and had segregated the facts of sexual molestation and considered them in isolation from other facts, which is impermissible in law. The Tribunal failed to consider that the actions of the respondent bank were vindictive, retaliatory and revengeful. Reliance was placed on State of Haryana v. Rajindra Sareen, 1972 1 SCC 267 and Jai Krishna Mandal & Anr. v. State of Jharkhand, 2010 14 SCC 534.