Natural justice in disciplinary inquiries requires notice and representation before adverse findings replace a favourable report.

In disciplinary proceedings under bank regulations, where the disciplinary authority retains final fact-finding and penal power, natural justice requires notice of tentative disagreement with a favourable inquiry report before adverse findings are recorded. The authority must record its reasons for disagreement and give the delinquent officer a real opportunity to represent on the proposed reversal. The Court treated this stage as part of the first and decisive stage of the disciplinary process and disapproved contrary views that no further opportunity was needed. The appeals failed, and the orders setting aside the penalties and directing release of retirement benefits were affirmed.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in disciplinary proceedings governed by the bank regulations, the disciplinary authority can disagree with a favourable inquiry report and record adverse findings without first giving the delinquent officer notice of its tentative reasons and an opportunity to represent.

Analysis: The regulations contemplated an inquiry by an inquiring authority, a report containing findings on each charge, and then action by the disciplinary authority. Regulation 7(2) expressly required the disciplinary authority, when disagreeing with the inquiry authority, to record reasons for disagreement and its own findings. Reading the regulations with the principles of natural justice, the Court held that this stage is part of the first and decisive stage of disciplinary proceedings, because the final finding and penalty rest with the disciplinary authority, not the inquiry officer. A delinquent officer whose report is likely to be reversed must therefore be informed of the tentative reasons for disagreement and given a chance to make a representation before adverse findings are recorded. The contrary views that no further opportunity was necessary were disapproved.

Conclusion: The disciplinary authority cannot reverse a favourable inquiry report and record adverse findings without first giving the delinquent officer an opportunity to represent on the proposed disagreement.

Final Conclusion: The appeals failed and the High Court's orders setting aside the penalties and directing release of retirement benefits were affirmed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where disciplinary regulations vest final fact-finding and penal power in the disciplinary authority, natural justice requires notice of tentative disagreement with a favourable inquiry report and a real opportunity of representation before adverse findings are recorded.

---