BURDWAN CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. versus ASIM CHATTERJEE & ORS.

BURDWAN CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. versus ASIM CHATTERJEE & ORS.

The bank was entitled to commence disciplinary proceedings against the employee for acts committed during previous employment in the affiliated Samity, as there was a link established under recruitment rules. As no prejudice was caused by non-supply of the enquiry report or second show cause notice, the proceedings were not vitiated.

Parties
Appellant: Burdwan Central Cooperative Bank Ltd.; Respondent No.1: Asim Chatterjee
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
18 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Disciplinary Proceedings, Dismissal, Natural Justice, Jurisdiction of Employer, Misconduct in Previous Employment
Service Law Labour Law Disciplinary Proceedings Dismissal Natural Justice Jurisdiction of Employer Misconduct in Previous Employment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Burdwan Central Cooperative Bank Ltd.

Appellant

Asim Chatterjee

Respondent No.1

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Can an employer take disciplinary action against an employee for acts done in previous employment with an affiliated society?
  2. 2 Was the disciplinary proceeding vitiated by non-supply of enquiry report or second show cause notice under Article 311(2)?

Ratio Decidendi

The bank was entitled to commence disciplinary proceedings against the employee for acts committed during previous employment in the affiliated Samity, as there was a link established under recruitment rules. As no prejudice was caused by non-supply of the enquiry report or second show cause notice, the proceedings were not vitiated.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Orders of the Single Judge and Division Bench of the High Court set aside.
  • Decision of the Bank dismissing respondent No.1 from service restored.