Rajasthan High Court Quashes Punjab National Bank’s Decision To Compulsory Retire Senior Manager For Six-Month Absence

Calling the punishment of compulsory retirement imposed on her “harsh”, the Rajasthan High Court has set aside the penalty awarded to a Senior Manager of Punjab National Bank in 2015 for being wilfully absent for six months and directed it to reinstate her forthwith without any back wages from the date of her compulsory retirement till reinstatement.

"This court is of the considered view that there must be fairplay in all administrative decisions, particularly in the matter of imposing punishment, when it takes away the very livelihood of the employee, which is not only going to affect him /her, but also affect his /her family members,” said Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand.

The doctrine of proportionality is thus a well recognised concept of judicial review and if it is found that the punishment is disproportionate, then it remains open for the court to interfere under its limited scope of judicial review, the court observed.

The court was hearing the petition challenging the compulsory retirement order of the Punjab National Bank imposed on the senior manager, who was transferred from Alwar to Jaipur branch in 2014. The petitioner could not join the Alwar branch and she remained absent for about six months i.e. from April, 2014 to November, 2014.

Despite the petitioner submitting multiple representations to reconsider her case and cancel her transfer to the Alwar Branch due to her family and medical circumstances, her requests were not accepted by PNB. Instead, she was repeatedly directed to join the Alwar branch.

When she failed to join, the respondents issued a charge-sheet for her such conduct of unauthorised absence and after holding enquiry, the punishment of compulsory retirement was given to her.

Justice Dhand observed that the scope of interference with decisions of the Disciplinary Authority is very narrow and limited in such matters, “but the High Court has powers of moulding the relief in cases where the punishment/penalty imposed shocks the judicial conscience.”

The court noted that the petitioner had submitted several applications for grant of Privilege Leave on medical grounds and medical certificates of the Medical Officers were also submitted. However, the same were not accepted by PNB and finally it was concluded that the petitioner remained willfully absent w.e.f. 30.04.2014 till the date of issuing charge, it added.

“The principles of proportionality of punishment vis-a- vis misconduct have been recognised by the Courts of various European countries as well as British Courts,” it said, adding that it has time and again been held that if the punishment imposed on an employee is out of proportion, the court has power to interfere with the same.

While setting aside the order of termination, the court remitted the matter back to the appropriate authority for reconsideration on the question of punishment and directed it to pass appropriate orders within a period of three months.

"Looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, and looking to the past /previous record of twenty- five years of unblemished service career of the petitioner and looking to the fact that several Privilege Leave were there in account of the petitioner and she submitted several applications for grant of P.L. on medical grounds and looking to the fact that the petitioner joined the transferred place of posting at Alwar Branch on 01.11.2014 and remained posted and continued there till passing of her order of compulsory retirement, the punishment order is harsh," said the court.

Case Title: Smt. Shashi Bala Meena v. Punjab National Bank through its Managing Director-Cum- Chief Executive Officer & Ors.

For Petitioner: Advocates Mr. Akhil Simlote,Dikshant Jain, Ashvini Raj Tanwar.

For Respondents: Advocates Ajay Shukla and Raghav Sharma.

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment