Non-Consideration Of Vital Aspects In Documents A Valid Ground To Review Disciplinary Authority's Order: Madras High Court

Madras High Court has held that material aspects that were not considered by the Disciplinary Authority can be construed as 'new evidence' by the Reviewing Authority to exercise its power of review.

The court observed that the power of reviewing authority is not intended for mechanical exercise and aims at a clear application of mind. This would include whether the nature of charges have been already proved or not and whether the punishment imposed is in commensuration with the gravity of charges so proved or not proved. The Reviewing Authority shall also examine if all the material aspects ought to be considered by the Disciplinary Authority have been taken into account or not.

"The disciplinary authority considered certain materials and the Reviewing Authority if found that certain intricacies which are vital aspects involved in that documents are not considered by the Disciplinary Authority, then, it is to be construed that such matters were not brought to the notice or not available or not considered by the Disciplinary Authority. Such materials are to be treated as new materials for the purpose of reviewing the order", observed the court.

The court was considering a challenge against the show cause notice issued by the Reviewing Authority of Canara Bank to a Branch Manager who cost the Bank Rs 72.94 lacks due to infirmities in sanctioning loans. Though the Disciplinary Authority imposed a punishment of reduction to a lower grade with lower pay which was confirmed by the appellate authority, the Reviewing Authority issued show-cause notice later on the ground that the charges proved against the employee reveals malafide intention on his part.

The Reviewing Authority was not convinced that the punishment imposed was proportional to the charges held as proved against the employee and wanted to examine whether a graver punishment should be imposed.

Justice SM Subramaniam observed that the above course of action taken by the Authority is within the purview of Clause 18 of the Canara Bank Officer Employees (Discipline & Appeal) Regulations 1976, contrary to the arguments raised by the petitioner employee. According to the said provision, the authority can review the order when any new material or evidence which could not be produced or was not available at the time of passing the order under review comes into light.

About distinguishable 'new material' that can be relied on for imposing higher punishment, the court referred to the second proviso to Regulation 18 that says that a higher punishment can be imposed by the Reviewing authority post enquiry and Disciplinary Authority's order after issuing a show-cause notice to the officer and after the receipt of representation with objections.

"The new material includes the non-consideration of certain vital factors or intricacies involved in the charges. Such non-consideration is also a ground to review the order of the disciplinary authority and such intricacies or such factors involved in certain documents not considered by the disciplinary authority are also to be construed as a new material for the purpose of exercise the power of review", the court observed after referring to the provisions of the Act.

The court went on to note that the power of review under the rule cannot be restricted to 'new material' in the form of documents alone. 'New Material' can be culled out from the available documents too and the power of review is exercisable in that case as well, the court opined.

With regards to the case before the court, the bench observed that the Reviewing Authority formed an opinion that the employee had malafide intentions while losing 72.94 lacs of the Company and the charges proved against him touch upon his honesty and integrity. The court also added that the reviewing authority issued the show cause notice since it strongly felt that the Disciplinary Authority has not taken such material aspects into account while determining the punishment. Therefore, according to the court, there are no infirmities in the show-cause notice to the employee and exercising the power of review.

The court also clarified that none of the observations made in the case for interpreting the power of review under the Regulation by analysing the merits shouldn't be relied upon by the Reviewing Authority. The court also added that the petitioner employee is free to submit all his objections to the Reviewing Authority within one week.

Accordingly, the court dismissed the writ petition filed by the Canara Bank employee challenging the show cause notice and the power of review by the authority at the given stage.

Case Title: Manimaran v. The Chief General Manager/ Reviewing Authority, Canara Bank & Ors.

Case No: W.P.(MD)No.3047 of 2022 and WMP(MD)Nos.2662 & 2663 of 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 72

Click Here To Read/ Download Order