IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

WPA 25292 of 2008

With
CAN 1 of 2021
HON’BLE JUSTICES MR. JUSTICE RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY
Dt. 10.06.2024
Manash Sen Chowdhury
Vs.
Bank of India & Ors.

The disciplinary authority cannot hold the employee guilty without providing an
opportunity to respond to the revised findings.

Constitution of India — Article 226 — Petitioner faced disciplinary proceedings for

alleged misconduct. Enquiry officer found him not guilty on one charge. Disciplinary
authority disagreed, holding him guilty without chance to respond to revised findings.
Held, the court held that the disciplinary proceedings were vitiated due to procedural
irregularities and violation of natural justice. The disciplinary authority failed to
provide a reasonable opportunity for the petitioner to defend himself against the
revised findings. The petition was accepted, and the final order of punishment was set
aside. [Para 9-10]

Important Points:

 Principles of Natural Justice: It is essential for the disciplinary authority to

provide the delinquent employee an opportunity to respond to tentative
findings before concluding guilt. Failure to do so breaches natural justice
principles.

 Supreme Court Precedent: The right to receive the inquiry officer's report
before the disciplinary authority's conclusion is fundamental for the
employee's defense, as established in "Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad
& Ors. v. B. Karunakar & Ors.".

 Procedural Irregularities: Differing with the inquiry officer's findings without

expressing tentative conclusions and directly imposing penalties constitutes a
procedural irregularity that vitiates the entire disciplinary process.