P A PANNEERSELVAM Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against whom charges have been framed by the respondents, challenging the proceedings dated 19.08.2011 passed by the first respondent by which the petitioner's request for conducting an enquiry in the Tamil language was rejected.

(2.) THE petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 19.08.2011 and consequently prays that the respondents will have to conduct the domestic enquiry, in respect of the charge memo dated 08.12.2010, in the Tamil language by recording the enquiry proceedings in Tamil.

(3.) PER contra, Mr.K. Sankaran, learned counsel for the first respondent submitted that the petitioner was issued with the charge memo in English and he has not objected to the charge memo. The petitioner has been allowed to have a defence representative, who could explain the proceedings conducted in English by translating the same to the petitioner. The petitioner has also filed an affidavit before this Court in English. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner does not understand English. The writ petition filed is premature, as the enquiry proceedings are yet to be completed. In support of his contention, the learned counsel has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in ChananSingh vs Registrar, Co-operative Societies reported in (1976) 3 Supreme Court Cases 361 and submitted that the writ petition will have to be dismissed.