CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA Vs. RATTAN LAL ARORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-Central Bank of India has filed this appeal against the judgment of Single Judge of this Court dated February 23, 1989 whereby writ petition filed by Rattan Lal Arora was allowed with the direction to the Bank to reinstate Mr. Arora forthwith with all consequential reliefs. It was further observed that in case appeal against acquittal is allowed, natural consequences shall follow.

(2.) Rattan Lal Arora was employed as Clerk with the Central Bank of India. A case was registered at the instance of the Bank on November 24, 1978. On the basis of the aforesaid F.I.R., the bank placed Rattan Lal Arora under suspension vide order dated December 7, 1978. The trial Magistrate on July 15, 1983 acquitted Rattan Lal Arora of the Criminal charges framed against him. This led him to file C.W.P. No. 2999 of 1998 for a direction to the Bank to reinstate him in service since he was acquitted by the criminal Court vide order dated July 15, 1983. The bank took the stand that since appeal against the order of acquittal was pending, no direction could be given in the writ petition. It was also urged that alternative remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act was available and no step was taken by Mr. Arora in that respect. It was also asserted that according to the Ist Bipartite settlement, an enquiry could be conducted against Shri Arora. The writ petition was allowed by the Single Judge holding that the employee could not be kept under suspension for years together and further, after acquittal by the criminal Court he deserves to be reinstated.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant during arguments has pointed out that departmental inquiry was initiated against Shri Arora which has not been completed. Charge sheet was served in May, 1990 and inquiry report was submitted on September 28, 1991. Shri Arora has further challenged the same and C.W.P. No. 16340 of 1991 is pending in this regard. The contention is that till disposal of the aforesaid writ petition, hearing of this appeal should be postponed. Otherwise on merits, it has been argued that when order of suspension was passed it was contemplated that departmental enquiry would also be conducted against Shri Arora and not investigation of the criminal case by the police.