The instant lis presents two questions for consideration by this Court. They are-
a) Does clause 4 of the Memorandum of Settlement dated 10th April 2002 create a bar on departmental proceedings continuing when the person subjected thereto is being tried before a criminal court for offences of the same origin? Page 1 of 19 CA No. 2518/2012
b) Does acquittal in some of the connected proceedings entail a benefit in the surviving proceedings? Further, inuring a right upon the delinquent employee of automatic discharge in disciplinary proceedings? (Para 1)
As a principle of law, we have already observed that a departmental proceeding pending criminal trial would not warrant an automatic stay unless, of course, a complicated question of law is involved. Also, acquittal in a criminal case ipso facto would not be tantamount to closure or culmination of proceedings in favour of a delinquent employee. (Para 21)
Applying all of the above-noted principles to the facts of the case, we find that neither was it the case of the delinquent employee that the trial to which he was subjected to begin within one year of the commission of the offence nor does the record speak to this effect. It is in the inquiry report[Annexure P-4 Pg.109 of the Paperbook], dated 3rd December 2001, that an objection to the disciplinary proceedings being conducted while a criminal case was being tried is registered, but even there, no date stands specified. (Para 24)
Further, it is not the case of the delinquent employee that the principles of natural justice were not complied with in the disciplinary proceedings of the bank. (Para 25)
Clause 4 of the MoS dated 10th April 2002 does not envisage a complete standstill of departmental proceedings as a result of the pendency of criminal proceedings. The position of law is that the stay of the latter is desirable, but the same is to be affected only for a reasonable period of time. (Para 29.1)
The nature of proceedings being wholly separate and distinct, acquittal in criminal proceedings does not entitle the delinquent employee for any benefit in the latter or automatic discharge in departmental proceedings. (Para 29.2)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
2023 STPL(Web) 306 SC
[2023 INSC 868]
State Bank Of India & Ors. Vs. P. Zadenga
Civil Appeal No. 2518 of 2012-Decided on 3-10-2023
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2023-STPLWeb-306-SC.pdf
