Criminal proceedings and departmental inquiry are on different planes and the conclusion of one does not vitiate the other.
In a Supreme Court case, State Bank of India and others are questioning whether clause 4 of a 2002 Memorandum of Settlement prevents departmental proceedings against an employee when they are facing criminal charges. The case revolves around the dismissal of an employee, who filed a writ petition against it, and the subsequent legal proceedings.
The Supreme Court found that clause 4 of the Memorandum does not completely halt departmental proceedings during criminal cases but suggests a stay. Acquittal in criminal cases does not automatically lead to discharge in departmental proceedings. The Court emphasized that each case should be evaluated individually.
The Court also highlighted that the delinquent employee did not rely on the Memorandum during the inquiry process, and there was no specific time frame mentioned for the trial. Therefore, the Court upheld the bank’s decision to dismiss the employee and stressed the importance of bank employees protecting the bank’s interests.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court overturned previous judgments and allowed the dismissal of the employee to stand, clarifying the interpretation of clause 4 of the Memorandum of Settlement.
STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
P. ZADENGA … RESPONDENT decided by the Supreme Court on October 3, 2023