The Rajasthan High Court clarified that non-supply of documents annexed with the charge sheets doesn't vitiate the disciplinary proceedings.

The Single Bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand examined the charge sheets and determined that the four employees were subject to different disciplinary authorities.

The Court made the observation while dealing with a petition filed by four employees of Bank of Baroda, challenging the issuance of separate charge sheets for similar allegations in connection with the IFLC Business Development case.

The employees contended that, under Regulation 10 of the Bank of Baroda Officer Employees’ (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976, common proceedings should be allowed for those facing similar charges. They also argued that the non-supply of documents, as mandated by Regulation 6.3, violated due process. While two of the employees fell under the jurisdiction of the General Manager & Zonal Head, the remaining two were under the Deputy General Manager (Compliance & Assurance).

Consequently, the Court held that two separate composite disciplinary proceedings could be conducted, one for each group, rather than a single proceeding covering all four employees.

"As per the case of the petitioners, the charges and allegations against all the three petitioners and one Abhishek Agarwal are similar, hence, departmental proceedings against them should not be conducted separately and the same ought to have been conducted through a common proceeding. While, as per the respondents, the charges against all the four delinquent employees are different and distinct and their respective Disciplinary Authorities are also different and separate," the Court said.

The Court further noted that the non-supply of documents annexed with the charge sheets did not vitiate the proceedings. Citing precedents such as Administrator, Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli v. Gulabhia M. Lad and decisions by the Delhi High Court in K.N. Gupta v. Union of India, B.L. Kohli v. Union of India, and Onkar Singh Khosla v. Union of India, the Bench affirmed that as long as the employees were provided an opportunity to inspect the documents, any delay or non-supply would not render the charge sheets illegal.

Thus, the High Court dismissed the petitioners’ challenge on both counts.

Cause Title: Shri Manish Kumar Balwani & Ors. v. Bank Of Baroda & Ors. [S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17059/2024]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Advocates Lokesh Mishra, Narendra Kumar Gautam

Respondent: Advocate Rupin Kala

Click here to read/download the Order


Justice Anoop Kumar DhandRajasthan High Court

Sukriti Mishra

    Sukriti Mishra was a Legal Correspondent at Verdictum. She covered the Supreme Court. She completed her graduation with BA. LL.B (Hons.) from The ICFAI University, Dehradun. Sukriti started covering courts in March 2022. She had previously worked with another legal news portal, where she covered the Delhi High Court and Trial Courts.