GOPALJI KHANNA versus ALLAHABAD BANK AND OTHERS

GOPALJI KHANNA versus ALLAHABAD BANK AND OTHERS

An Executive Director entrusted with the charge of Chairman and Managing Director is entitled to exercise all executive powers, perform all duties, and discharge functions attached to those offices, including the power of review under Regulation 18. The enhancement order was valid and not rendered void due to lack of express designation of Executive Director as reviewing authority, nor was it an invalid act of delegation. The appellant understood the order as one issued by a person discharging the functions of Chairman and Managing Director.

Parties
Appellant: Gopal Ajit Khanna; Respondents: Allahabad Bank and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
27 February 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Dismissal of Writ Petition by Allahabad High Court
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Disciplinary Proceedings, Delegation of Power, Review of Penalty, Meaning of Statute Law
Service Law Administrative Law Disciplinary Proceedings Delegation of Power Review of Penalty Meaning of Statute Law

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gopal Ajit Khanna

Appellant

Allahabad Bank and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Dismissal of Writ Petition by Allahabad High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Executive Director holding charge of Chairman and Managing Director can exercise review power under Regulation 18 of the Allahabad Bank Officer Employees' (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976
  2. 2 Whether the order enhancing penalty passed by Executive Director is null and void for lack of authority
  3. 3 Whether such review amounts to invalid delegation of statutory power

Ratio Decidendi

An Executive Director entrusted with the charge of Chairman and Managing Director is entitled to exercise all executive powers, perform all duties, and discharge functions attached to those offices, including the power of review under Regulation 18. The enhancement order was valid and not rendered void due to lack of express designation of Executive Director as reviewing authority, nor was it an invalid act of delegation. The appellant understood the order as one issued by a person discharging the functions of Chairman and Managing Director.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • No order as to costs