1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.10.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.(MD)No.4742 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 M.Natarajan : Petitioner vs. 1.The Deputy General Manager, Disciplinary Authority, Indian Bank, Head Office, Vigilance Department, 66, Rajaji Salai,Chennai. 2.The Assistant General Manager (PBD&BASC), Inquiry Officer, Head Office, 66, Rajaji Salai, Chennai. : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pursuant to the order passed by the first respondent in VG:TRY:FC:2033:2010-11:CS:11/38, dated 05.04.2011 and quash the same and consequently, direct the second respondent to defer the departmental inquiry till disposal of criminal case pending in R.C.No.10(S)2010 on the file of CBI/SCB/Chennai. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Subash Babu For Respondents : Mr.Suresh For M/s.Aiyar & Dolia ORDER The petitioner was working as a Chief Manager in the Trichy Cantonment Branch of the respondents bank. He was placed under suspension on account of a criminal case launched by the Central Bureau of Investigation. Pending the criminal case, when the respondents bank framed a charge and proceeded with the enquiry, the petitioner sought for stalling of the departmental enquiry, pending the criminal case. When he made a representation dated 29.03.2011, seeking for stay of the conduct of the proceedings of the enquiry, in view of the fact that the investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation is in progress, by the impugned communication dated 05.04.2011, the petitioner was informed that his request cannot be considered, as the grounds raised in the departmental enquiry are entirely different from the investigation conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation. Challenging the said communication, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. 2. When the matter came up on 26.04.2011, notice regarding admission was granted. Pending the notice on admission, this Court granted an order of interim stay initially for a limited period i.e., till 15.06.2011. Subsequently, the interim stay was extended without specifying any outer time limit. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. When the matter came up today, Mr.Suresh appearing for M/s.Aiyar and Dolia, learned standing counsel for the respondents bank brought to the notice of this Court that the issue raised herein is no longer res integra and the matter has been squarely answered by the Supreme Court vide its judgment in Indian Overseas Bank v. P.Ganesan reported in 2008(1) SCC 650. The Supreme Court, after reviewing all the previous case laws and after referring to the judgment in Capt.M.Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd., reported in 1999(3) SCC 679, held that the standard of proof in a disciplinary proceedings and that in a criminal trial is different. If there are additional charges against the employees of the bank, that enquiry can still be proceeded. In paragraph No.29, the Supreme Court observed that the discretionary jurisdiction vested on the High Court under Article 226 should be exercised keeping in view the conduct of the parties. 4. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents bank dated 12.07.2011, it was stated that the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner by the Central Bureau of Investigation and the departmental proceedings are different. The departmental proceedings initiated by the bank is with reference to the petitioner acting against the interest of the bank and failed to discharge his duties with utmost integrity, honesty, devotion and diligence. It was further stated that after getting his explanation on the charge memo, the enquiry officer has been appointed. The enquiry officer has given notice for appearing in the enquiry and it is at this stage, the petitioner has come forward to file the present Writ Petition. 5. In the light of the above factual matrix and the legal precedent stated, there is no case made out to interfere with the impugned order. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AS) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Deputy General Manager, Disciplinary Authority,Indian Bank, Head Office, Vigilance Department, 66, Rajaji Salai,Chennai. 2.The Assistant General Manager (PBD&BASC), Inquiry Officer, Head Office,66, Rajaji Salai, Chennai. +1cc to M/S.Aiyar & Dolia, Advocate SR.No.35508 +1cc to Mr.M.Subash Babu, Advocate SR.No.35558 Order made in W.P.(MD)No.4742 of 2011 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 Dated:- 12.10.2011 SML PA/28.10.2011/2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/