IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH JANUARY 2008 / 27TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 37920 of 2007(L) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- O.P.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, S/O.PADMANABHAN NAIR (LATE), 55 YEARS, JUNIOR CLERK (UNDER SUSPENSION) KSRTC STAFF CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.K.141, KOTTAYAM - 1, RESIDING AT KOCHUVEEDU, THIRUVATHUKKAL, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. JOINT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KOTTAYAM. 2. K.S.R.T.C STAFF CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO.K.141, ADAM TOWER, STAR JUNCTION, KOTTAYAM - 686 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE PRESIDENT, K.S.R.T.C. STAFF CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.K.141, ADAM TOWER, STAR JUNCTION, KOTTAYAM - 686 001. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/01/2008 ALONG WITH WPC.NO.1987 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.37920/2007 L APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DTD. 1/03/2006 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S STATEMENT WITH THE QUERIES OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT AND THE ANSWERS GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 27/02/2006. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPLY DTD. 11/03/2006 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER DTD. 19/07/2006 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 16/03/207 IN WP(C)NO.4746/07. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN I.A.11637/07 IN WP(C) NO. 4746/07 DTD. 7/09/2007. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE STATEMENT DTD. 17/06/206 SUBMITTED BY SRI.V.RAMAN NAIR BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT DTD. 9/07/2007 SUBMITTED BY SRI. K.G.GOPAKUMAR, ADVOCATE. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE OBJECTION DTD. 26/07/07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DIRECTOR BOARD SUB COMMITTEE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT BANK. EXT.P10: COPY OF ORDER (COMMUNICATION) DTD. 16/08/07 OF THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF 2ND RESPONDENT BANK. EXT.P11: COPY OF ORDER DTD. 26/09/07 OF THE ENQUIRY OFFICER SRI. K.G.GOPAKUMAR, ADVOCATE. EXT.P12: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DTD. 5/11/2007 IN WP(C) NO.29123/2007. EXT.P13: COPY OF THE OBJECTION DTD. NIL SUBMITTED ON 29/10/2007 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUB COMMITTEE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT BANK. Kss ..2/- ...2..... WPC.NO.37920/2007 L EXT.P14: COPY OF THE NOTICE REQUIRING THE PETITIONER TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY HE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FROM SERVICE, DTD. 14/11/2007 ISSUED BY THE SUB COMMITTEE, ON BEHALF OF THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT BANK. EXT.P15: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 22/01/2007 IN WP(C) NO.34187 OF 2007. EXT.P16: COPY OF THE REPLY DTD. 21/11/2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT BANK. EXT.P17: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 22/11/2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P18: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 7/12/2007 ISSUED BY THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF R2 BANK DISMISSING THE PETITIONER FROM SERVICE. EXT.P19: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 16/11/2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. ================================== W.P.(C)Nos.37920 of 2007 & 1987 of 2008 ================================== Dated this the 17th day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT Petitioners are employees of a Co-operative Bank. Pursuant to certain allegations against them, a sub committee was constituted to carry out the disciplinary proceedings. The enquiry officer conducted the enquiry, placed the materials before the sub committee, which is called the disciplinary committee. That committee decided to impose certain punishments on the petitioners. Such imposition of penalty is challenged on the ground that the disciplinary authority, in so far as the petitioners are concerned, is the President of the Society going by the statutory rules and therefore the sub committee does not have the power to impose such a punishment. Whatever be the nice distinction between the sub committee acting as a WPC37920/07&1987/08 -:2:- disciplinary committee with a separate enquiry officer to conduct the enquiry, it is necessary that the competent disciplinary authority, namely the President, has to consider the question of imposition of penalty at the first instance. This is because, against the decision of the President, the delinquent will have a right of appeal to the committee of the Society, of course, with the rider that in deciding that appeal, any person who has participated in the sub committee as part of the disciplinary committee will have to exclude himself from participating in the committee of the Society which hears the appeal. 2. The grievance of the petitioners at this point of time could well be redressed if the President of the Society hears the petitioners by treating the decisions communicated by the disciplinary committee as show cause notices and takes a final decision on the question of WPC37920/07&1987/08 -:3:- imposition of any penalty on the petitioners. Such hearing shall be conducted with an opportunity to the petitioners to show before the President that no penalty at all is liable to be imposed on them. In the light of what is stated above, these writ petitions are disposed of directing that the decisions of the disciplinary committee impugned in these writ petitions shall be treated as notices to show cause against the imposition of penalty and the petitioners shall be heard by the President on the question of penalty. Until such a decision is taken, petitioners will be permitted to continue in service as they did immediately before the issuance of the impugned decisions. Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge. sl.