No Disciplinary Proceedings Can Be Initiated After Employee Retires Or After Extended Period Of Service : Supreme Court
19 Nov 2024 11:45 PM
The Supreme Court invalidated the disciplinary proceedings initiated against a bank employee after the completion of his extended period of service. The disciplinary proceeding initiated after the superannuation or after the extended period of service cannot be sustained, the Court observed.
“As has been held by this Court on more than one occasion, a subsisting disciplinary proceeding i.e. one initiated before superannuation of the delinquent officer may be continued post superannuation by creating a legal fiction of continuance of service of the delinquent officer for the purpose of conclusion of the disciplinary proceeding (in this case as per Rule 19(3) of the Service Rules). But no disciplinary proceeding can be initiated after the delinquent employee or officer retires from service on attaining the age of superannuation or after the extended period of service.”, the bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan said.
The Respondent-employee joined SBI as a clerk-typist in 1973 and progressed through the ranks to managerial positions. He was due for superannuation on 26.12.2003, having completed 30 years of service. SBI extended his service until 01.10.2010 for operational reasons.
Disciplinary proceeding against the respondent was not initiated on 18.08.2009 when the first notice to show cause was issued but were initiated only on 18.03.2011 when the disciplinary authority issued the charge memo to the respondent.
The Appellant-bank contended that since the notice to initiate the disciplinary proceedings was initiated before the end of the extended period, therefore the respondent-employee can't claim exemption from the disciplinary proceeding.
However, the respondent-employee challenged the proceedings as void ab initio, arguing they were initiated after his superannuation. He stated that Rule 19(3) of SBI Officers' Service Rules permits continuation of disciplinary proceedings if initiated before retirement, but it does not allow proceedings to commence after superannuation.
Dismissing the appellant's argument, the judgment authored by Justice Ujjal Bhuyan referring to the case of Union of India vs. K.V. Jankiraman (1991) observed that disciplinary proceedings are deemed to start from the date of filing of the charge sheet, not earlier notices. Since the charge sheet was filed after the date of completion of the extended term, therefore, the court held the disciplinary proceedings to be non-est in law.
In essence, the Court said that to make the disciplinary proceedings valid the SBI should have initiated the disciplinary proceedings before the end of the extended term i.e., within the service period. Proceedings initiated after the superannuation or after the end of the extended term cannot be sustained, the court held.
The Court also clarified that if proceedings are initiated against an employee before their retirement, they are deemed to have continued in service, allowing the proceedings to be carried forward and concluded post-retirement.
“if initiated against an employee before he retires from service, could be continued and concluded even after his retirement and for the purpose of conclusion of the disciplinary proceeding, the employee is deemed to have continued in service but for no other purpose.”, the court said.
The appeal was dismissed, and the bank was directed to release the pending dues of the respondent employee.
“That being the position, we see no merit in the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Appellants are directed to release all the service dues of the respondent expeditiously and at any rate not later than six weeks from today.”, the court held.
Appearance:
Mr. Balbir Singh, senior counsel for the appellants
Mr. Vishwajit Singh, senior counsel for the respondent
Case Title: STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. VERSUS NAVIN KUMAR SINHA, CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1279 OF 2024
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 901
.jpg)
.jpg)
