Dismissal from service for unauthorized absence for one month is shockingly disproportionate

Punjab and Haryana High Court Modifies Bank Employee's Dismissal to Compulsory Retirement. Court finds dismissal for unauthorized absence disproportionate, modifies it to compulsory retirement considering the employee's long service.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently delivered a significant judgment in the case of Amarjit Singh Chawla v. Punjab and Sind Bank, ruling that the dismissal of a bank employee for unauthorized absence was "shockingly disproportionate" given his long and unblemished service record. The court modified the punishment to compulsory retirement in the interest of justice.

The case involved Amarjit Singh Chawla, a former employee of Punjab and Sind Bank, who was dismissed from service one month before his retirement after 35 years of service. The dismissal was based on his unauthorized absence from duty between September 2009 and June 2010. Chawla contended that his absence was due to deteriorating health and severe depression, which were supported by medical certificates submitted to the bank.

The disciplinary authority initially dismissed Chawla on May 12, 2012, a decision upheld by the appellate and reviewing authorities in subsequent years. Chawla filed a writ petition challenging these orders, arguing that the punishment was disproportionate, especially given his long service without any significant prior misconduct.

The court, presided over by Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj, considered past judgments, including those in the cases of Smt. Kailash Sharma v. State of Punjab and O.P. Gupta v. Life Insurance Corporation of India. These precedents emphasized the need to consider an employee's service record and the proportionality of punishment in disciplinary proceedings.

Justice Bhardwaj noted that the dismissal was solely based on unauthorized absence and did not consider Chawla's lengthy service record. The court found the punishment to be excessively harsh and set aside the dismissal order, substituting it with compulsory retirement. This modification allows Chawla to retain his retirement benefits, which would have been forfeited under the dismissal.

The court declined to remand the matter for a fresh decision, citing the lapse of 13 years since the initial order and Chawla's advanced age of 72 years. However, the court left open the possibility for the bank to continue with any other disciplinary proceedings against Chawla if deemed necessary.

This judgment highlights the judiciary's role in ensuring fairness and proportionality in employment-related disciplinary actions, especially where long-serving employees are involved.

Bottom Line:

Dismissal from service for unauthorized absence from duty was held to be shockingly disproportionate in view of the long and unblemished service record of the petitioner.

Statutory provision(s): Service Law, Disciplinary Proceedings

Amarjit Singh Chawla v. Punjab and Sind Bank, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2765215