The Himachal Pradesh High Court has delivered a mixed verdict in a case involving a senior officer of the Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. While the court declined to quash a disciplinary chargesheet and inquiry report against Deputy General Manager K C Bhardwaj, it directed the bank to release all his pending promotional and financial benefits, which have been held up since 2022.
Court's Ruling: Benefits to Flow, Inquiry to Go On
Justice Sandeep Sharma, presiding over the case on December 18, partly allowed a writ petition filed by Bhardwaj. The judge ruled that the petitioner is entitled to receive all due and legitimate promotional benefits along with his pending pay dues from 2022 onwards, complete with up-to-date interest. However, this release is subject to the final outcome of an ongoing departmental inquiry against him.
The officer had challenged a chargesheet dated July 20, 2024, and an inquiry report dated May 15, 2025. He argued that the bank's Board of Directors (BoD), in a decision on April 28, 2025, had proposed dropping the disciplinary proceedings, but this was not implemented.
A Long-Standing Dispute Rooted in 2022
The origins of this complex case trace back to a Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) meeting held on September 29, 2022. During that meeting, Bhardwaj's name for promotion was kept in a sealed cover because disciplinary proceedings were pending against him.
The situation escalated on February 28, 2023, when the bank's Managing Director imposed a major penalty, reverting Bhardwaj to the lower post of Senior Manager. After an unsuccessful appeal before the BoD, Bhardwaj first approached the High Court.
In a previous judgment on December 11, 2024, the High Court had directed the BoD to reconsider his appeal afresh. Following this order, the BoD waived the penalty, which led to Bhardwaj's promotion to the post of Deputy General Manager on February 6, 2025.
Why the Inquiry Was Allowed to Continue
The bank's management, however, presented a key argument before the court. They contended that the BoD's decision to drop the charges was never formally confirmed in a subsequent board meeting. Therefore, they asserted that the inquiry initiated on August 13, 2024, could lawfully continue.
Justice Sandeep Sharma accepted this contention. The court held that since the departmental inquiry was still pending, it would not be appropriate to quash the chargesheet and the inquiry report at this stage. This refusal forms the core of the court's decision to allow the inquiry process to reach its logical conclusion.
The final order thus creates a clear distinction: the employee must receive his financial entitlements without further delay, but the bank retains the right to proceed with the disciplinary process to determine any potential misconduct.
