Madras Excessive Courtroom ne haal hello mein is baat par zor diya ki public financial institution ke workers ko honesty and integrity ka bahut dhyaan rakhna chahiye, khaaskar jab woh buyer aur public ke paise se deal kar rahe hote hain. Courtroom ne financial institution ke worker ke khilaaf liye gaye disciplinary motion ka help kiya hai, yeh kehkar ki uski galti ne public ka belief toda hai aur di gayi saza bilkul sahi thi.
Case Ka Background
State Financial institution of India (SBI) ne ek pehle ke courtroom order ke khilaaf attraction ki thi. Yeh order 7 February 2020 ka tha, jisme ek worker, Palaniappan, ko job se nikalne ke determination ko hata diya gaya tha aur financial institution ko us worker ko wapas lene ka order diya tha, full monetary advantages ke saath jab tak wo retire nahi ho jata.
Palaniappan, jo SBI ke Karaikudi department mein clerk aur assistant tha, ke khilaaf fraud ke kai complaints saamne aaye the. Kuch foremost allegations yeh the:
- Ek buyer, B. Ghouse Miyan, ke naam pe Rs. 15,000 ka cheque fraudulently encash karna aur paisa unhe na dena.
- Dusra cheque, Rs. 4,000 ka, bina payee ki jaanakari ke encash karna.
- Ek aur cheque, Rs. 9,000 ka, 5 mahine tak apne paas rakhna bina use financial institution mein jama kiye.
Disciplinary Motion
Jab financial institution ne Palaniappan ke khilaaf fraud ke allegations par inside investigation shuru ki, to unhone 5 alag-alag fees mein se 4 fees mein use responsible paya. Yeh fees buyer ke paise ka galat use karne aur apni duties ko theek se nahi nibhaane se jude the. Iske baad, financial institution ne use apni job se direct dismiss kar diya, matlab ki uska kaam poori tarah se khatam kar diya gaya aur ab use additional koi advantages nahi milne wale the.
Lekin, Palaniappan ne is faisle ke khilaaf attraction ki. Uski attraction ka base yeh tha ki itne saalon tak kaam karne ke baad bhi use itni harsh punishment di gayi hai, jo use khudke liye unfair lagti thi. Is attraction ko sunte hue financial institution ki appellate authority ne thoda narmi dikhayi. Unhone Palaniappan ke 14 saal ke lambe kaam ka report dekha, jo kuch had tak theek tha, aur punishment ko thoda scale back kar diya.
Financial institution ne phir Palaniappan ko discharge from service ka tag de diya report me, jo dismissal se thoda totally different hai.
Discharge ka matlab hota hai ki use service se hata diya gaya, lekin usko kuch advantages diya ja sakte hain.
Authorized Problem
Palaniappan ne in dono faislon ko courtroom mein problem kiya, aur writ courtroom ne uske favour mein decison diya, yeh kehkar ki disciplinary course of mein procedural points the. Uske baad SBI ne attraction file ki, yeh argue karte hue ki writ courtroom ne apne adhikaar ke bahar jaake unke faisle mein interrupt kiya hai. Financial institution ne yeh bhi bataya ki asli complainant ne paisa milne ke baad apni shikayat wapas le li thi, lekin Palaniappan ke fraud ke saboot saaf the.
Courtroom Ka Faisla
Justices Dr. Anita Sumanth aur G. Arul Murugan ki bench ne financial institution ke level ko theek maana. Unhone ye saaf kiya ki inside financial institution inquiries mein strict authorized guidelines ko hamesha observe nahi kiya jata, aur paperwork ne Palaniappan ke fraud ko saabit kiya. Cashier ke cost data aur unique cheque se saboot mil gaye the ki Palaniappan ne paise ka misuse kiya hai. Use apne bachaav ka poora probability mila tha, lekin wo koi legitimate clarification nahi de paya.
Courtroom ne yeh bhi kaha ki banking sector mein honesty and belief bahut zaroori hain, kyunki workers public ke paise ke sath deal karte hain. Is case mein fees itne severe the ki courtroom ne financial institution ka unique determination wapas laakar Palaniappan ko service se discharge kar diya.
Conclusion
Courtroom ne yeh dobara reaffirm kiya ki public financial institution workers ke liye honesty aur belief sabse zaroori qualities hain. Is case mein financial institution ka disciplinary motion bilkul justified tha, aur yeh public confidence banaye rakhne ke liye zaroori thi.
