BANK OF BARODA & ORS. vs RANJEET KUMAR

Judgment text excerpt

$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 30.04.2025 + LPA 235/2025 & CM APPL. 19087/2025 BANK OF BARODA & ORS. .....Appellants Through: Ms.Praveena Gautam, Mr.Pawan Shukla & Ms.Tissy Annie Thomas, Advs. versus RANJEET KUMAR .....Respondent Through: Mr.Shanker Raju & Mr.Nilansh Gaur, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL) 1. This appeal has been filed challenging the Judgment dated 31.01.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(C) 13645/2009, titled Ranjeet Kumar v. Bank of Baroda And Ors., by which the learned Single Judge has allowed the Writ Petition filed by the respondent herein with the following direction: - “36. The last question that now arises for consideration is what relief can be granted to the Petitioner at this stage. Ordinarily, this Court may have remanded the matter back to the Bank from the stage where the illegality crept in while issuing the Disagreement Note with a direction to issue a fresh Disagreement Note with a tentative opinion and call for the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed LPA 235/2025 Page 1 of 12 By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:06.05.2025 18:33:14 representation of the Petitioner. However, the peculiar facts of this case do not commend this course of action and I am not persuaded to remit the matter back to the DA. The reason to hold so is not far to seek. The penalty imposed on the Petitioner is removal with superannuation benefits and even if the matter is remitted to the DA for a fresh consideration, the penalty cannot be on a higher scale. As this Court has held above that Petitioner cannot be denied the benefits of Gratuity and PF with the existing penalty, no useful purpose will be served in remanding the matter back for