R.K. SOLANKI Vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) :- In this petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has called in question the legality, validity and propriety of disciplinary proceedings which ended with imposition of punishment of dismissal from service by order dated 07.06.2014. The petitioner has also challenged the appellate order and the revisional order by which his appeal and revision were dismissed. Petitioner has prayed for reinstatement with all consequential benefits.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts are that the petitioner at the relevant time was working as Assistant General Manager. He was posted as Principal Central Bank Officers Training College at Bhopal. It is submitted that during the training programme of newly recruited Probationary Officers, it was noticed that certain officers are not acting properly and their action shows lack of discipline and decorum. The petitioner, in the capacity of Principal of College issued notice dated 12.5.2010 (Annexure P/2). To wriggle out of the contemplated disciplinary action, one probationary trainee officer/ complainant lodged the FIR against the petitioner on 16.05.2010. On the strength of that FIR, the charge-sheet dated 04.09.2010 (Annexure P/4) was issued against the petitioner. On the basis of said FIR, the trial was conducted which was registered as RT No.764/10. The trial court by judgment dated 06.02.2012 convicted the petitioner for commission of offence under section 354 of the Penal Code and sentenced him for imprisonment for a period of 18 months.

(3.) Shri Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that because of aforesaid conviction, the petitioner was dismissed from service. However, the judgment of the trial court dated 06.02.2012 was called in question in Cr.A.No.167/12 by the petitioner. The appellate court by judgment dated 23.01.2013, acquitted the petitioner. Shri Agarwal by taking this court to paragraphs 24 to 27 of the said judgment contends that acquittal of the petitioner was on merits and amounts to 'honourable acquittal'. The case of the petitioner is that the allegations/ factual foundation in the disciplinary proceedings and in criminal case, are exactly same. There is no iota of deference in the factual matrix of both the cases. In that event, once the petitioner is acquitted by the criminal court, there was no occasion for the employer to conduct a disciplinary proceedings.