'Cannot Face Adverse Consequences Over Choice Of Faith': Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Bank Employee's Premature Retirement
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the premature retirement of a former Senior Manager of the erstwhile United Bank of India after taking note of his allegations that sustained caste-based discrimination at the workplace compelled him to renounce Hinduism and embrace Islam.Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay observed that constitutional guarantees under Articles 14, 15 and 25 are “not...
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the premature retirement of a former Senior Manager of the erstwhile United Bank of India after taking note of his allegations that sustained caste-based discrimination at the workplace compelled him to renounce Hinduism and embrace Islam.
Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay observed that constitutional guarantees under Articles 14, 15 and 25 are “not ornamental declarations but enforceable mandates,” and stressed that no adverse administrative consequence can be predicated upon an individual's choice of faith.
“The petitioner's assertion regarding change of religion, whether arising from personal conviction or otherwise, falls squarely within the protective ambit of this constitutional guarantee. No adverse administrative consequence can be predicated upon an individual's choice of faith,” the Court held.
The petitioner, Md. Shams Biswas alias Tapan Biswas, had alleged that he faced systemic humiliation and exclusion on account of his Dalit background during his service in the bank, which ultimately led him to convert to Islam. He further claimed that after attempting to expose internal irregularities and corruption, he became the target of retaliatory administrative action.
The case arose from a March 22, 2016 memorandum by the bank retiring him prematurely under Regulation 19(1) of the United Bank of India (Officers') Service Regulations, 1979.
The bank defended its action by contending that the petitioner had developed a pattern of sending abusive and accusatory communications to various authorities and institutions, raising concerns about his mental fitness and suitability for service. It relied upon a medical assessment by a Board of psychiatrists at Medical College and Hospital, Kolkata, which reportedly diagnosed him with a persistent delusional disorder.
However, the Court found that the decision-making process suffered from procedural impropriety, non-application of mind and violation of natural justice.
Justice Bandyopadhyay noted that the competent authority had mechanically approved the recommendation of the Special Committee without independent reasoning. The Court further found fault with the bank's refusal to furnish the petitioner with the medical report and committee recommendations despite repeated requests.
“The failure to do so has rendered the process fundamentally unfair and violative of the principles of natural justice,” the Court observed.
The Court also criticised the bank for invoking the power of premature retirement instead of initiating disciplinary proceedings if the petitioner's conduct was genuinely considered objectionable.
“Regulation 19(1)… is not designed to serve as a substitute for disciplinary proceedings,” the judgment stated.
While the Court clarified that the materials on record did not conclusively establish that the retirement decision was directly based on caste or religion, it held that the very existence of such allegations imposed a “heightened duty” upon the authorities to ensure transparency, fairness and objectivity.
Setting aside the retirement order and all consequential actions, the Court directed the bank to reconsider the matter afresh after supplying all materials relied upon, including medical reports and committee recommendations, and after granting the petitioner an opportunity of representation.
Case Title: Md. Shams Biswas @ Tapan Biswas v. United Bank of India (now Punjab National Bank)