P.N. ANANTHANARAYANAN Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, STATE BANK OF INDIA, CENTRAL OFFICE BUILDING, MUMBAI,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the show cause notice issued by the second respondent, in letter No. G.M. (CB)/264 dated 16 -11 -2001, asking the petitioner to submit his explanation as to why disciplinary action should not be initiated against him, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition.

(2.) According to the petitioner, he is the Deputy General Manager in the first respondent Bank working in the Rehabilitation and Recovery Branch of the bank at Chennai. In respect of BIFR accounts and the guidelines, he made a written complaint to the Chairman of the first respondent bank against G.M.(C) Sri S.C. Das, the G.M. (CB), Sri K.C. Raut and the Coimbatore D.G.M. Sri Joshi. Thereafter, he was issued with the impugned show cause notice dated 16 -11 -2001 by the second respondent alleging that he has made indiscriminate comments and insinuations in his letter dated 22 -10 -2001 which fall totally short of the good conduct expected of an officer of the bank and calling upon him to show cause within 7 days from the date of receipt of the letter as to why disciplinary action should not be initiated against him for such misconduct. Aggrieved by the notice, he has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) The Assistant General Manager (Per and HRD), State Bank of India, Chennai Local Head Office has filed a counter affidavit on behalf of the 1st respondent bank, denying various averments made by the petitioner. It is stated that the impugned letter/notice is only in the nature of calling for the reasons and would not tantamount to initiation of disciplinary proceedings as envisaged in the State Bank of India Officers Service Rules. As per Rule 68 (1) (i) of the said Rules, the disciplinary authority either suo motu or on the direction of any higher authority may initiate disciplinary proceedings as against any of the official. In this case, the letter bearing No. GM (CB)/264 dated 16 -11 -2001 is only in the nature of calling for reasons/explanation from the petitioner for certain improper expressions and remarks casting aspersion etc., made in his (petitioner's) communication dated 22 -10 -2001. In case the reporting authority is satisfied with the explanation/reasoning given by the petitioner for making such remarks, the reporting authority may not bring the matter to the notice of the disciplinary authority and drop the entire issue. Hence this letter calling for the reasons/explanation can, in no way, be termed as a show cause notice and hence, would not tantamount to initiation of disciplinary proceedings.