India News | 'Delinquent Officer' Has No Absolute Right to Be Represented by Agent of His Choice in Dept Proceedings: SC

New Delhi, Jan 4 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that a "delinquent officer" has no absolute right to be represented in departmental proceedings through the agent of his choice and that it can be restricted by the employer.

A bench of justices MR Shah and Sanjiv Khanna, which set aside an order of the Rajasthan High Court, said that the High Court has committed an error in permitting the respondent officer of a bank, who was accused of committing irregularities, to be represented in a departmental inquiry through an ex-employee.

Also Read | Gujarat: 15-Year-Old Girl Dies By Suicide After Being Scolded By Father Over Tuition Fees Money.

The top court passed the verdict on an appeal of Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank (RMGB) against the division bench order of the High Court by which it had dismissed the appeal of the bank against the single judge bench order.

The apex court said that the view taken by the single judge bench and confirmed by the division bench is unsustainable.

Also Read | OmiSure: Tata Medical and Diagnostics Develops Kit To Detect Omicron COVID-19 Variant in RT-PCR Tests.

“Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and order passed by the single judge confirmed by the division bench permitting the respondent delinquent officer to be represented in the departmental proceedings through ex-employee of the bank is hereby quashed and set aside,” it said.

The bench said, "It is observed that there is no absolute right in favour of the delinquent officer's to be represented in the departmental proceedings through the agent of his choice and the same can be restricted by the employer."

The High Court had passed the order on a plea of one Ramesh Chandra Meena who, working as a cashier-cum-clerk, is alleged to have committed certain irregularities amounting to misconduct.

A show-cause notice was issued by the Bank dated April 24, 2019 whereby it was stated that while working at Rawastar Branch, he had committed irregularities like while granting loans to farmers/villagers under the loan scheme and he did not take adequate precautions and without written mandates of borrowers, he transferred the loan amount in favour of another person and had thus committed misconduct.

Meena, while denying the charges, informed the Enquiry Officer that he may be allowed to defend himself in the inquiry through a legal practitioner.

Keeping in view the restrictions under the provision of Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulation, 2010, on the engagement of legal practitioner during the inquiry, his request permitting him to defend himself through a legal practitioner was declined by the Enquiry Officer.

Subsequently, the matter was taken by Meena to the High Court, which directed the Bank to permit him to be represented through a retired officer of the Bank in the disciplinary proceedings.

The top court bench said, “As a matter of right in each and every case, irrespective of whether charges are severe and complex in nature or not, the employee as a matter of right cannot pray that he may be permitted to represent through the agent of his choice”.

It said that applying law laid down by this court in the earlier decisions to the facts of the case on hand, the respondent employee has no absolute right to avail the services by ex-employee of the Bank as his Defence Representative (DR) in the departmental proceedings.

It said that the Regulations put specific restrictions on engagement of a legal practitioner and it provides that for the purpose of an enquiry under Regulation, 2010, the Officer or Employee shall not engage a legal practitioner without prior permission of the competent authority.

The bench said that the High Court has not appreciated the effect of the Handbook, which has been approved by the Board of Directors and it is applicable to all the employees of the Bank and its clause with respect to the defence representative specifically provides that DR should be serving official/ employee from the Bank.

“As per the Bank there is a justification also to permit the delinquent officer to be represented in the departmental proceedings through serving official/ employee from the Bank only.

"The Bank has justified its action of not permitting ex-employee of the Bank as DR and according to the Bank, the exemployee who themselves may have been subject of a disciplinary enquiry/ charge sheet/dismissed from service”, it said.

(The above story is verified and authored by Press Trust of India (PTI) staff. PTI, India’s premier news agency, employs more than 400 journalists and 500 stringers to cover almost every district and small town in India.. The views appearing in the above post do not reflect the opinions of LatestLY)