Court Confirms Dismissal of Former Bank Officer for Reckless Lending and Misconduct
In a significant ruling, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court, Srinagar Bench, has upheld the right of Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd to continue disciplinary proceedings against an employee post-retirement, provided service rules allow such action. The judgment, delivered by Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Sanjay Parihar, confirmed the dismissal of Naseer Ahmad Sheikh, a former Branch Head, for misconduct related to reckless lending practices.
The case revolved around disciplinary proceedings initiated against Sheikh before his retirement on June 30, 2021. The bank had charged him with various acts of omission and commission during his tenure at Branch Offices Barzulla and Rangreth, which included unauthorized lending practices. Despite his superannuation, the proceedings continued under the bank's service rules, culminating in his dismissal effective from his retirement date.
The High Court emphasized that disciplinary proceedings, initiated while an employee is in service, could continue post-retirement if the service rules permit. The court clarified that such proceedings ensure accountability and can lead to penalties, including dismissal, which may affect retirement benefits like pensions.
The court also addressed the scope of judicial review in disciplinary matters, reaffirming that constitutional courts are not appellate bodies for reviewing departmental inquiries. Their interference is limited to ensuring procedural fairness, adherence to natural justice, and the absence of perverse findings.
Justice Kumar highlighted the importance of a bank officer's role, stressing that unauthorized lending and failure to ensure the end-use of loans constitute misconduct, regardless of whether financial loss occurred. The court found that Sheikh had sanctioned Temporary Overdrafts (TODs) without the necessary approvals, exposing the bank to financial risks.
The judgment further analyzed Rule 337(c) of the Officers' Service Manual-2000, which mandates employees to act under their best judgment unless directed by a superior. The court noted that Sheikh failed to obtain written confirmation of verbal directives, thus not absolving him of responsibility.
Overall, the court ruled that the bank's disciplinary actions were justified and that the procedural process was adhered to correctly. The court set aside the previous writ court's judgment that had favored Sheikh, thereby dismissing his petition and reinforcing the bank's decision to terminate his services.
Bottom line:-
Disciplinary proceedings initiated against an employee before superannuation can continue after retirement if service rules permit. Constitutional courts have limited scope to interfere in departmental inquiries, focusing only on procedural fairness and adherence to natural justice.
Statutory provision(s): Rule 259 of OSM-2000, Rule 337(c) of OSM-2000, Rule 372 of J&K Bank Officers Recruitment, Discipline, Conduct and Appeal Rules 2000
