M RAJA Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two Writ Petitions are at the instance of an employee of State Bank of India (who is now under suspension pending disciplinary proceedings) and the prayer is to quash the order dated 17.01.2014, rejecting the request for keeping the departmental proceedings in abeyance till the conclusion of the connected criminal cases [W.P(MD)No.6080 of 2014] and the enquiry report dated 04.03.2014 and the second show cause notice dated 05.03.2014, calling upon him to submit his explanation with reference to the enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer [W.P.(MD)No.5224 of 2014].

(2.) The petitioner was appointed by the State Bank of India as Assistant on 05.08.1982. The petitioner worked at Vangal Branch of State Bank of India from 1998 to 2002. Thereafter, he was transferred to Kulithalai Branch. While he was working at Kulithalai Branch, by order dated 03.01.2003, he was placed under suspension by the first respondent. Thereafter, a charge memo dated 20.11.2003 was issued to the petitioner containing as many as 17 charges. The petitioner submitted his detailed explanation on 07.02.2004. The first respondent appointed the second respondent as Enquiry Officer. The petitioner was given permission to engage an Officer of the Bank as defence representative. There were proceedings between the petitioner and the bank with respect to the appointment of an office bearer of the Trade Union as defence representative. The Review Application filed by the bank against the earlier judgment dated 05.12.2007 was allowed by the Division Bench. The petitioner filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court and the same was also dismissed. The petitioner, thereafter, engaged Thiru.S.Gunasekhar as his defence representative.

(3.) In the meantime, pursuant to the complaint preferred by the Bank, the police registered a case in Crime No.5 of 2003 against the petitioner and two others. The police, after concluding investigation, laid the charge sheet before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Karur and it was taken on file in C.C.Nos.494/2006, 495/2006 and 496/2006. P.W.1 was examined in chief and the matter is kept in cold storage. The petitioner, in the meantime, submitted an application, requesting the bank to keep the disciplinary proceedings in abeyance till the conclusion of criminal proceedings. Since there was no follow-up action taken by the bank or the enquiry officer to keep the proceedings in abeyance, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition before this Court in W.P.(MD)No.679 of 2014. The Writ Petition was for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from conducting the disciplinary proceedings till the disposal of the criminal proceedings. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court by order dated 10.01.2014 and a Mandamus was issued to the bank to consider the representation on merits. It is the grievance of the petitioner that even before the receipt of a copy of the order, the first respondent passed the impugned order dated 17.01.2014, rejecting the request to keep the disciplinary proceedings pending till the disposal of the criminal proceedings. The said order is challenged in W.P.(MD)No.6080 of 2014.