G VENU Vs. SYNDICATE BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 20.08.2003 in W.P.No.45362 of 2002 in a matter relating to permission to be accorded for engagement of a lawyer. There is a bipartite agreement dated 27.4.2002, which covers this aspect. It reads as follows:-

(2.) Mr.Chandru, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant strenuously contends that the appellant belongs to S.C/S.T.Association and that S.C/S.T.Association is ready to lend its services to defend the appellant, but the enquiry officer appointed by the respondent bank is not permitting such a move. Insofar as the submission that the appellant is entitled to be represented by S.C/S.T.Association is concerned, in our considered view S.C/S.T.Association cannot be construed as a registered trade union of bank employees or representative of a registered trade union of employees of the bank or a representative of the state federation or all India Organisation. If the above clauses are applicable, then the appellant is entitled as of right to seek for legal assistance. But, if sub-clause (iii) of para 12 is to be invoked, then the appointment of a lawyer to defend the appellant is not a matter of right. It is only when the bank permits that a lawyer's services can be had, then the bank also cannot arbitrarily and without valid reasons, deny such legal assistance by a lawyer.

(3.) We had an occasion to consider this aspect in a similar matter and in fact concerning the same bipartite agreement in W.A.No.3497 of 2002. By our judgment dated 26.11.2002, we held that there is no automatic right on the delinquent to seek for lawyers assistance unless the facts and circumstances of the case are made out. In that case, the learned single Judge has held that the engagement of a lawyer was a matter of right, but we did not agree and modified the finding of the learned single Judge to the effect that there was no automatic right vested in a delinquent employee to engage a lawyer and that was hedged with a condition of satisfaction of the management/bank to permit the delinquent, having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case. In that case, we held that the facts and circumstances of that case warranted grant of permission to be defended by a lawyer. In the instant case too, we find that the allegations which are made against the appellant constituting the charge sheet, need a lawyer's assistance. We may observe, before parting, that the management, be it Government or banks or other public sector undertakings, which comes under the definition of 'State' in Article 12 of the Constitution of India, should avoid unnecessary litigation of this nature and be liberal in acceding to the request of legal assistance.