ALLAHABAD BANK & ORS. versus KRISHAN PAL SINGH

Citation: [2021] 6 S.C.R. 204 · Decided: 20-09-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R. SUBHASH REDDY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
204
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 6 S.C.R.
ALLAHABAD BANK & ORS.
v.
KRISHAN PAL SINGH
(Civil Appeal No. 5808 of 2021)
SEPTEMBER 20, 2021
[R. SUBHASH REDDY AND SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.]
Service Law – Dismissal – Monetary compensation in lieu
of reinstatement – Respondent was Clerk-cum-Cashier in appellant-
Bank – Burning incident of Bank records – Suspecting complicity
of respondent, he was placed under suspension and disciplinary
proceedings initiated against him – On completion of enquiry,
respondent was dismissed from service – He raised industrial
dispute – Industrial Tribunal–cum–Labour Court held that
misconduct alleged against respondent was not proved, but a case
was made out by the management of loss of confidence, and
accordingly ordered payment of compensation of Rs.30,000/- in lieu
of reinstatement – Respondent filed Writ Petition – High Court
ordered reinstatement of respondent with all consequential benefits
– On appeal, held: Though, there was strong suspicion, there was
no acceptable evidence on record for dismissal of respondent –
Reinstatement with full back wages is not automatic in every case,
where termination / dismissal is found to be not in accordance with
procedure prescribed under law – Considering that respondent was
in effective service of the Bank only for about six years and he is
out of service since 1991, and in the meantime, respondent had
attained age of superannuation, ends of justice would be met by
awarding him lump sum monetary compensation of Rs.15 lakhs –
Labour Laws.
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD:1. The directions issued by the High Court for
reinstatement were stayed by this Court. During the pendency
of these proceedings, the respondent – workman had attained
age of superannuation. Though, there was strong suspicion,
there was no acceptable evidence on record for dismissal of the
workman. However, as the workman has worked only for a
period of about six years and he has already attained the age of
superannuation, it is a fit case for modification of the relief
   [2021] 6 S.C.R. 204
204
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
205
granted by the High Court. The reinstatement with full back
wages is not automatic in every case, where termination /
dismissal is found to be not in accordance with procedure
prescribed under law. Considering that the respondent was in
effective service of the Bank only for about six years and he is
out of service since 1991, and in the meantime, respondent had
attained age of superannuation, it is appropriate that ends of
justice would be met by awarding lump sum monetary
compensation. Accordingly, it is directed that payment of lump
sum compensation of Rs.15 lakhs be made to the respondent,
within a period of eight weeks. Failing to pay the same within
the aforesaid period, the respondent is entitled for interest @
6% per annum, till payment. [Para 8][207-D-F]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.5808
of 2021.
From the Judgment and Order dated 25.04.2019 of the High
Court of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench in Writ Petition (S/S) No.692 of
1998.
Rajesh Kumar Gautam, Anant Gautam, Nipun Sharma, Madhur
Tewatia, Ravi Solanki, Advs. for the Appellants.
Rakesh Taneja, Ms. Jaikriti S. Jadeja, Advs. for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
R. SUBHASH REDDY, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is preferred by the appellant – Bank, aggrieved
by the Order dated 25.04.2019 of the High Court of Allahabad,
Lucknow Bench, passed in Service Single No. 692 of 1998. By the
aforesaid order, the High Court has quashed the award dated 07.10.1997,
passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal–cum–Labour
Court so far as it relates to refusal of reinstatement of the respondent
with back wages and issued directions, directing the appellants to
reinstate the respondent with all consequential benefits.
3. The sole respondent herein was appointed as Clerk-cum-
Cashier in the appellant – Allahabad Bank on 23.09.1985 and his service
was confirmed on 24.03.1986. During the year 1989, he was posted in
Aurangabad Branch, District Lakhimpur Kheri, Uttar Pradesh. On
08.02.1989, there was fire accident in the Bank and an FIR was
ALLAHABAD BANK & ORS. v. KRISHAN PAL SINGH
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
206
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 6 S.C.R.
registered with regard to burning incident of Bank records by unknown
persons. Suspecting the complicity of the respondent, he was placed
under suspension by order dated 13.02.1989 and disciplinary proceedings
were initiated agai

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.