Alok Kumar v. Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3470 of 2018 Alok Kumar S/o Manoj Singh, Aged About 25 Years Officer Grade-I (Under Suspension) At Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank, Regional Office Ambikapur (Chhattisgarh) R/o Village Marsaiti, P.O. And P.S. Teghri, District Begusarai (Bihar) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank Through Its Managing Director Cum Chairman, Head Office, Mahadev Ghat Road, Sunder Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank, Through Its Regional Manager, Regional Office First Floor, Vivek Complex, Sangam Gali, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.

3. Branch Manager, Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank, Branch Office, Sedam, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.

----Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For Respondents :

Mr. N. Naha Roy, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 09/05/2018

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is being simultaneously prosecuted both in the departmental enquiry as well as before the criminal case.

2. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the co-accused in the departmental enquiry namely "Sandeep Kumar Singh" had already preferred a writ petition before this Court vide WPS No. 2377/2018 and this Court had already allowed the writ petition vide its order dated 27.03.2018. That while allowing the writ petition this Court had stalled the departmental enquiry till the pendency of the criminal case.

3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that since the case of the petitioner is also identically placed, the present writ petition may also be allowed in similar terms as has been held by this Court in the case of Sandeep Kumar Singh (supra).

4. The counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact, both firstly in respect of the petitioner being the co-accused person in the criminal case as also in the departmental enquiry initiated, and secondly the fact that the petitioner also is being prosecuted in the same criminal case and the departmental enquiry, in which Sandeep Kumar Singh is also being prosecuted.

5. Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the order passed by this Court in the case of Sandeep Kumar Singh (supra) dated 27.03.2018, this Court has no hesitation in allowing the present writ petition also in similar terms.

6. Accordingly the present writ petition stands allowed in similar terms, in as much as the departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner shall stand stalled till the criminal case is finally concluded and thereafter the respondents would be at liberty to proceed further from the stage the inquiry proceedings stands as on date.

7. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition also stands allowed and disposed off.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved