TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court emphasizes clear judgment writing, remands case for fresh consideration</h1> <h3>State Bank of India and Another Versus Ajay Kumar Sood</h3> State Bank of India and Another Versus Ajay Kumar Sood - TMI Issues Involved1. Validity of the disciplinary proceedings and the charges against the respondent.2. Proportionality of the penalty imposed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT).3. Comprehensibility and adequacy of the High Court's judgment.4. Remand of the case for fresh consideration by the High Court.Detailed Analysis1. Validity of the Disciplinary Proceedings and the Charges Against the RespondentThe appellant issued a charge sheet in 2013 against the respondent for gross misconduct, which included various charges such as disrupting the functioning of the bank branch, misbehavior with the branch manager, use of abusive language, unauthorized absence, and issuance of cheques without sufficient balance. The enquiry officer found the respondent guilty of all charges. The disciplinary authority issued a show-cause notice for dismissal, and upon receiving no response, imposed the penalty of dismissal. The respondent's appeal was subsequently rejected by the bank's appellate authority.2. Proportionality of the Penalty Imposed by the CGITThe respondent challenged the termination before the CGIT under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. The Tribunal found the enquiry proceedings and report vitiated due to violations of natural justice but allowed the bank to present evidence to justify the charges. The CGIT concluded that the first charge of misconduct was proved but found the penalty of dismissal harsh and disproportionate, modifying it to compulsory retirement. Both parties challenged this modification before the High Court of Himachal Pradesh.3. Comprehensibility and Adequacy of the High Court's JudgmentThe Supreme Court found the judgment of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh incomprehensible, stating that judgments should convey the reasoning and process of thought leading to the final conclusion clearly. The Supreme Court emphasized that judgments must be understandable to all stakeholders, including the litigants and the public, to maintain trust in the judicial process. The High Court's judgment, filled with complex language and lacking clarity, failed to meet these standards.4. Remand of the Case for Fresh Consideration by the High CourtGiven the incomprehensibility of the High Court's judgment, the Supreme Court remanded the case back to the High Court for fresh consideration. The Supreme Court highlighted the need for judgments to be written with clarity and precision, ensuring that the reasoning is intelligible and logical. The Supreme Court also provided guidelines for judgment writing, emphasizing the importance of structuring judgments in a manner that makes the issues, rules, application, and conclusions easily identifiable.ConclusionThe Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and remanded the case back to the High Court for fresh consideration. The High Court was urged to expedite the disposal of the writ petitions, given the long history of the case and the termination dating back to 2013. The Supreme Court also clarified that all rights and contentions of the parties on merits are kept open upon remand.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
