CHENNAI: TWO disciplinary authorities attached to a nationalised bank were on Wednesday punished under the Contempt of Courts Act and directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a week with a fine of ` 2,000 each.
KS Ganapathy Subramanian, Chief Manager, Disciplinary Authority (DA), knowing fully well about the ambit of the order of the court in the vacate stay petition, had intentionally and willfully violated the same. So, the court has no hesitation to protect the majesty of justice and hold that the conduct of the contemnors -- Ganapathy and N Subramanian, Chief Manager, Conduct and Disciplinary Action Cell -- are prima facie fatal in the way of administration of justice.
Therefore, the duo of Indian Overseas Bank are liable for punishment as defined under Sec. 12 of the Contempt of Courts Acts, Justice MV Muralidharan said and imposed the punishment.
The fine should be deposited with the TN Mediation and Conciliation Centre attached with the High Court immediately, the judge said.
The judge was allowing a contempt application from SV Chennakrishnan, a retired employee of the bank.
According to petitioner, the disciplinary authority (DA) had issued two charge sheets against him and some other employees in connection with an alleged scam concerning recruitment. The DA sent a notice for the personal appearance of the petitioner, who moved the High Court, which on May 25, 2016, granted a stay on the order of the DA. The DA filed a petition to vacate the stay order and the High Court reserved its orders on the plea on May 30.
However, the same day, the DA issued a notice to the petitioner for his personal appearance on May 31 and an order of dismissal was also passed. Hence, the present petition.
The judge said the duo, without complying with the order of the court, passed the dismissal order in a hasty manner. “This would show that the above authority has simply ignored the order of this court which would directly affect the Majesty of Justice. The above officers willfully and intentionally violated the order of this court. So this court has no hesitation to protect the majesty of justice,” the bench said and imposed the punishment.