AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mr. Manav Gelil Thomas, learned counsel appears for petitioner/appellant. Mr. N. Kumaraswamy, learned counsel appears for respondent.
Vide judgment dated 19.08.2025, Writ Appeal No.731 of 2025 filed at the instance of the petitioner-appellant Bank, was dismissed. The operative portion of the judgment in the writ appeal reads as under:
“A perusal of the minutes of disciplinary enquiry of the writ petitioner shows that 434 documents were produced by the Charged Officer on 10.05.2021 and handed over to the Enquiry Officer. It could not be expected from the Charged Officer to undertake cross-examination on any of those documents suddenly presented during the course of enquiry. Even otherwise, he was precluded from furnishing a proper written statement of defence if such documents in support of the statement of imputation of misconduct in support of articles of charge on 191 instances were not supplied along with the articles of charge. In such circumstances, the learned writ Court was right in holding that the departmental proceedings have suffered for violation of the principles of natural justice and the applicable Regulations. Therefore, the appellant bank was directed to conduct enquiry afresh into the allegations strictly in conformity with the Regulations, 1977, and conclude it within a period of four (4) months. It appears that the bank has not yet initiated the de novo enquiry from the stage after furnishing of complete list of documents and list of witnesses along with copy of statement of witnesses, if any, in accordance with Regulation 6(3) of the Regulations, 1977. We therefore do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. Time for conclusion of the departmental proceedings is extended for a period of four (4) months from today.”
The instant application is filed by the petitioner bank for extension of the time limit for conclusion of the departmental proceedings for a period of four months from the date of the judgment in the writ appeal. The petitioner bank has given narration of chronology of events, which are as under:
| Sl. No. | Date | Perception |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 19.08.2025 | The Division Bench of Hon'ble Telangana High Court upheld the order of Single Judge of Hon'ble High Court dated 25.04.2025 and dismissed the Writ Appeal vide judgment dated 19.08.2025. The appellant bank was directed to conduct enquiry afresh into the allegations strictly in conformity with the Regulations, 1977 and conclude it within a period of four (4) months. Time for conclusion of the departmental proceedings is extended for a period of four (4) months from 19.08.2025. |
| 2 | 23.09.2025 | Corrigendum to Charge Sheet dated 01.10.2020 in respect of Annexure-III under Regulation 6 of Punjab National Bank Officer Employees' (Discipline & Appeal) Regulations 1977, served upon Sh. Bhanochand Mattapudi (PF No.326207 & new Emp Id. 5226809) Manager (Under Suspension), BO: Gulbarga, CO: Hubli in connection with certain alleged irregularities during his tenure from 21.09.2016 to 13.08.2018 as Officer/Officer – Incharge at BO: Toopran, CO: Secunderabad. |
| 3 | 24.09.2025 | Appointment of EO & PO Shr: Mohammad Thousif Rahamat Jama (Emp. ID: 5124552), Chief Manager, CO: Hyderabad |
| as Enquiry Officer and Shri G Suresh Kumar (Emp.ID: 5196355), Manager - Branch Head, BO: Toopran (919700), CO: Secunderabad as Presenting Officer | ||
| 4 | 25.09.2025 | Preliminary Hearing Scheduled on 01.10.2025 (Not Held) |
| 5 | 25.09.2025 | Representation of Bhanuchand regarding partial and improper implementation of Hon'ble High Court Orders 1. Non Provision of Documents with the list of Allegations 2. Failure to Reinstate 3. Non-payment of Subsistence Allowance |
| 6 | 26.09.2025 | Protest against conducting de novo enquiry without full compliance with the orders of the Hon'ble High Court in W.P.No.33546/2021 & W.A.No.731/2025. Memorandum dated 25.09.2025 (Regarding Departmental Enquiry into Charge Sheet dated 01.10.2020) |
| 7 | 26.09.2025 | Acknowledgement dated 26.09.2025 (03.25 pm) regarding receipt of corrigendum dated 23.09.2025 |
| 8 | 26.09.2025 | Confirmation of Mr Bhanuchand regarding he has not been engaged or employed in any business, profession or vocation of any kind from November 2021 to the present date. |
| 9 | 29.09.2025 | Mattapudi Bhanu Chand sought a 15 days extension from the receipt of the hard copies of all listed documents to submit his written statement of documents |
| 10 | 30.09.2025 | He was permitted to submit statement of defense in writing (in duplicate) to the undersigned within 15 days from the receipt of hard copies of all listed documents. In case, he wants to refer the relevant records, he was permitted to visit the concerned office for one day for which he may inform the date of his visit to the Circle Head, CO: Secunderabad. In case, no reply is received within the stipulated period of 15 days (including the time for reference of relevant records), it will be presumed that he has nothing to say in his defense, admit the charge and the matter shall be considered ex-parte by the Disciplinary Authority, in accordance with the provisions of Punjab National Bank Officer Employees' (Discipline & Appeal) Regulations, 1977 |
| 11 | 01.10.2025 | Reply to the representation dated 25.09.2025 & 26.09.2025 |
| 12 | 02.10.2025 | Representation on payment of Subsistence Allowance and TA/DA |
| 13 | 08.10.2025 | Request for release of arrears amount to his saving account 605600020000050 |
| 14 | 08.10.2025 | Reply to the letter dated 02.10.2025 regarding payment of subsistence allowance and TA/DA. Subsistence allowance along with arrear credited to SF Account on 08.10.2025. |
| 15 | 10.10.2025 | Reminder 1 for submission of Written statement of Defense. |
| 16 | 10.10.2025 | 1. Submission of Statement of Defense denying charges 2. Submissions of part written statement of defense List of Additional Document and Additional Witness |
| 17 | 13.10.2025 | Reminder 2 for submission of Written Statement of Defense |
| 18 | 13.10.2025 | Submission of Part Written Statement of defense through mail dated 13.10.2025 |
| 19 | 14.10.2025 | Letter to Disciplinary Authority Urgent representation against unauthorized deduction of Rs.30,576/- from October 2025 |
| Subsistence Allowance | ||
| 20 | 18.10.2025 | Letter to Mr Bhanuchand to fully co-operate in the Enquiry Proceedings. |
| 21 | 18.10.2025 | Preliminary Hearing Scheduled on 22.10.2025 |
| 22 | 18.10.2025 | Letter to Enquiry Officer Protest against Commencement of Enquiry Proceedings due to Non Provision of Annexure-III documents and Incomplete defense stage |
| 23 | 18.10.2025 | Letter to Disciplinary Authority Urgent Representation against Procedural Violations and Unauthorised Haste by Enquiry Authority- Non Provision of Annexure III Documents |
| 24 | 20.10.2025 | Letter to Enquiry Officer Protest against Commencement of enquiry Proceedings due to Non Provision of Annexure-III documents and Incomplete defense stage |
| 25 | 20.10.2025 | Letter to Disciplinary Authority Urgent Representation against Procedural Violations and Unauthorized Haste by Enquiry Authority-Non Provision of Annexure III Documents. |
| 26 | 22.10.2025 | Preliminary Hearing Conducted on 22.10.2025 |
| 27 | 23.10.2025 | Addressed to the Letter dated 10.10.2025, 13.10.2025, 18.10.2025 and 20.10.2025 |
| 28 | 29.10.2025 | Representation of Bhanuchand to DA Strong Protest against unauthorized Commencement of Enquiry, Gross Violation of Regulation 6(4) and failure to pass a speaking order on Written Statement of Defense, constituting a travesty of Regulations and a deliberate attempt to bypass the mandate of the Hon'ble High Court in W.P. No.33546/2021 and WA No.731/2025 |
| 29 | 01.11.2025 | Scheduled for Regular Hearing on 04.11.2025 |
| 30 | 02.11.2025 | Objection to unauthorized haste and continuation of departmental enquiry without completion of mandatory pre-enquiry procedures, despite High Court directives, and attendance under protest. Sought Defense Assistant-Defense Counsel who is a retired officer of another Nationalized Bank. |
| 31 | 03.11.2025 | Regular Hearing Rescheduled on 10.11.2025 Informed to engage defense representative (Officer Employee) from our bank who is in service |
| 32 | 07.11.2025 | Representation to Enquiry Officer Urgent representation and Formal Objection to the unlawful and rescheduling and Continuation of De novo Enquiry on 10.11.2025 |
| 33 | 07.11.2025 | Representation Copy of Disciplinary Authority Urgent representation and Formal Objection to the unlawful and rescheduling and Continuation of De-novo Enquiry on 10.11.2025 |
| 34 | 08.11.2025 | Enquiry Officer replied to Bhanuchand on 08.11.2025 |
| 35 | 10.11.2025 8.10 am | Request for adjournment of Departmental Enquiry hearing scheduled for November 10, 2025 due to ill health |
| 36 | 10.11.2025 | Request for Change of PO due to medical issue |
| 37 | 10.11.2025 | Change of PO Shri Venkata Uday Bhaskar Konduri (5123051) Senior Manager, CO: Scunderabad |
| 38 | 13.11.2025 | Submission of medical Certificate mentioning 10 days bed rest for recovery of ill health by Bhanuchand |
| 39 | 19.11.2025 | Formal objection and urgent representation regarding continuation of de novo enquiry fixe on 21.11.2025 without completing mandatory pre-enquiry requirements under Regulation 6 of PNB Officer Employees' (D&A) Regulations, 1977 - in violation of Hon'ble High Court directions in W.P.N o.33546/2021 (25.04.2025) and W.A. No.731/2025 (19.08.2025) |
| 40 | 19.11.2025 | Reply by Enquiry Officer to representation |
| dated 18.11.25-M Bhanuchand, (5226809) regarding continuation of de novo enquiry. | ||
| 41 | 20.11.2025 | Strong Objection to Unlawful and biased Continuation of De Novo Enquiry and Demand for Adherence to Hon'ble High Court Orders and Principles of Natural Justice. |
| 42 | 21.11.2025 | First Regular Hearing was conducted on 21.11.2025 |
| 43 | 01.12.2025 | Second Regular Hearing was conducted on 01.12.2025 |
| 44 | 02.12.2025 | Urgent protest and formal refusal to sign manipulated daily proceedings – demand for adherence to principles of natural justice and regulation 6(15) permitting written defence |
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant application was filed on 08.12.2025 before the period of four months calculated from 19.08.2025 had elapsed. Though the petitioner bank had prayed for extension of four months time, since the departmental proceedings have been concluded and only a formal order of the disciplinary authority is to be passed, the time for concluding the departmental proceedings may be extended for a suitable period so that the disciplinary authority may pass the order. The petitioner has also sought to refer to the chronology of the proceedings and the representations made by the petitioner from time to time during the proceedings. The respondent/writ petitioner has been trying to delay the domestic enquiry proceedings by raising certain untenable objections.
Counter affidavit has been filed to the instant interlocutory application opposing the prayer.
Learned counsel for the respondent has also referred to the letter dated 27.02.2026 of the disciplinary authority which indicates that the bank has filed an application on 05.02.2026 before this Court seeking extension of period for conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings, after expiry of four months period.
Learned counsel for the petitioner also points out that a contempt case is pending before the learned writ Court. However, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the contempt case was filed before the disposal of the writ appeal.
Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the chronology of the dates explaining the progress of the disciplinary proceedings after passing of the judgment by this Court, it appears that the respondent has also been seeking time on a number of dates, some of which are in the nature of protest against the commencement of enquiry proceedings due to non provision of Annexure-III documents; representation against procedural violations and unauthorized haste by the enquiry authority; similarly, protest against commencement of proceedings due to non provision of Annexure-III documents; representation against failure to pass a speaking order on written statement of defence; objection to unauthorised haste and continuation of departmental enquiry without completion of mandatory pre-enquiry procedures, representation and formal objection to the unlawful rescheduling and continuation of de novo enquiry and also on health/personal grounds.
A perusal of the dates and stages of the disciplinary proceedings conducted after passing of the judgment in the writ appeal, does not create any impression that there has been deliberate delay on the part of the disciplinary authority in concluding the departmental proceedings. It further appears that the application for extension of time was filed on 08.12.2025 before conclusion of the time period for concluding the departmental proceedings as per the judgment of this Court. The letter of the disciplinary authority annexed to the counter affidavit of the respondent/writ petitioner may be an inadvertent error regarding the date of filing of interlocutory application which can be ignored.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, since the disciplinary proceedings have been concluded and only final order is to be passed, the time limit granted by this Court vide judgment dated 19.08.2025 in W.A.No.731 of 2025 for passing the final order in the disciplinary proceedings is extended upto 21.08.2026.
The I.A. is, accordingly, disposed of.