Punjab & Sind Bank Vs Raj Kumar (Supreme Court of India)
The Supreme Court restored the punishment of dismissal from service, holding that parity in punishment cannot be claimed where roles, rank, and responsibility differ.
In this case, the respondent (a Senior Manager) was dismissed for misconduct involving misappropriation and connivance, while co-delinquents (a junior officer and a gunman) were awarded lesser punishments. The High Court had reduced the penalty to compulsory retirement, citing Article 14 (parity).
The Supreme Court reversed this, holding that:
- Judicial interference in punishment is limited, and courts should interfere only if punishment is shockingly disproportionate,
- Higher the post, higher the responsibility and accountability, and
- A senior managerial officer cannot be equated with lower-level employees for parity in punishment.
The Court emphasized that:
- The respondent’s supervisory role and higher trust justified stricter punishment,
- Granting parity with subordinates was misconceived and illogical, and
- The punishment was neither disproportionate nor shocking to conscience.
It reiterated settled principles:
- Courts cannot substitute punishment unless it is irrational or perverse, and
- Doctrine of proportionality applies only in extreme cases.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court:
- Set aside the High Court’s orders, and
- Restored the original punishment of dismissal.
The ruling strongly reinforces: “Authority carries accountability” – higher rank warrants stricter consequences, and parity cannot override role-based responsibility in disciplinary matters.
FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT/ORDER
