Read Time: 06 minutes

The Supreme Court on Friday remarked that a bank employee always holds the position of trust where honesty and integrity are the sine qua non.

A bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S Oka made this observation while allowing an appeal filed by United Bank of India filed against an order of the Division Bench of the High Court.

The respondent employee, one Bachan Prasad Lall of the bank was alleged to have fraudulently prepared nine credit transfer vouchers on various dates on the pretext of payment of interest towards fixed deposits and credited the whole amount to one saving account opened in the name of one Smt. Asha Devi (admittedly the fake account prepared by respondent-employee).   

In order to adjust the said amount, he manipulated the other book records of the Bank using forged signatures. After such nature of allegations stood proved, the disciplinary authority, after taking into consideration the record of inquiry and the post held by the employee, punished him with the penalty of dismissal from service.

Later, a reference was made for adjudication by the appropriate Government in exercise of its powers under clause(d) of sub-Section(1) and sub­-Section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

The Tribunal concluded that the inquiry was fair and proper and the charges stood proved but while exercising its power under Section 11A of the Act 1947, the Tribunal under observed that the punishment awarded to the respondent employee of dismissal was not commensurate with the charge levelled against him and accordingly, substituted the punishment of dismissal with an order of   reinstatement after lowering down of two stages in his basic salary that he was getting at the time of his dismissal.

It was found that even after the finding of guilt recorded by the inquiry officer in his report was confirmed at all later stages by the   disciplinary/appellate authority and even after judicial scrutiny by the Division Bench in the impugned judgment, the Bench still refrained form from interfering on the premise that the employee had superannuated in the year 2007. 

Looking into seriousness of the nature of allegations levelled against the respondent-employee, the top Court held that the punishment of dismissal inflicted upon the employee in no manner could be said  to be shockingly disproportionate which would have required interference with by the Tribunal in exercise of its power under Section 11A of the Act 1947.

"...merely because the employee stood superannuated in the meanwhile, will not absolve him from the misconduct which he had committed in discharge of his duties and looking into the nature of misconduct which he had committed, he was not entitled for any indulgence. The Bank employee always holds the position of trust where honesty and integrity are the sine qua non but it would never be advisable to deal with such matters leniently", held the top Court.

With this view, the interference made by the Tribunal and the High Court in the impugned judgment was set aside.  

Cause Title: United Bank of India vs Bachan Prasad Lall