Questioning the Legitimacy of a Disciplinary Dismissal. An insightful exploration of fairness, evidence evaluation, and labor law application in employment termination.

Case Note & Summary

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition by Bank of Baroda challenging the Central Government Industrial Tribunal's (CGIT) awards, which declared the dismissal of Devshi Valji Kundadia illegal and unjustified. The CGIT's findings held the dismissal unsupported by credible evidence, emphasizing the perverse nature of the Enquiry Officer's findings and directing reinstatement with partial back wages.

The court upheld the principle that domestic inquiries must adhere to fairness and logical evidence evaluation. Any dismissal decision unsupported by credible evidence or based on unreliable testimony undermines natural justice.

1. Background and Dismissal

Kundadia, a typist-clerk at Dena Bank (merged into Bank of Baroda), was assigned cashier duties on 14 September 1991. A cash shortage of ₹10,000 was discovered, which Kundadia compensated for from his personal account. He faced allegations of misappropriation, fraud, and prejudicial actions based on an incident involving erroneous denomination details and subsequent events.

2. Tribunal Awards

The CGIT delivered a Part-II Award in 1997 deeming the findings of the Enquiry Officer perverse. The Final Award (2012) declared Kundadia's dismissal illegal, ordering reinstatement with 60% back wages.

3. High Court Review

The High Court evaluated the credibility of the star witness, S.T. Suryawanshi, whose delayed and inconsistent testimony raised suspicions. The court emphasized that the dismissal lacked credible evidence to justify the allegations.

4. Respondent’s Arguments

Kundadia maintained innocence, highlighting his prompt repayment of the shortage and procedural irregularities in the disciplinary action. He also alleged victimization due to his trade union activities.

5. Bank’s Contentions

The petitioner bank defended the dismissal based on the Enquiry Officer's findings, asserting that domestic inquiries need only satisfy the preponderance of probabilities. Ratio Decidendi:

The dismissal order was unsupported by sufficient evidence. Domestic inquiries, while not bound by strict evidence rules, must base decisions on credible and logical evidence. Reliance on perverse findings or unreliable testimony breaches natural justice principles.

Acts and Sections Discussed: Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970 Relevant as the framework for Dena Bank’s operations before merging into Bank of Baroda. Labor Laws and Principles of Natural Justice Addressed through the CGIT’s evaluation and court’s emphasis on fairness in domestic inquiries. Subjects:

Labor law, employee dismissal, domestic inquiries, and principles of natural justice.

Domestic Inquiry, Misappropriation, Back Wages, Employee Rights, Natural Justice, Industrial Tribunal, Evidence Evaluation.