VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

DECISION - 309
635
second has no such beneficial interest is erroneous. The matter is
principally guided by the terms of the agreement, inter se between
the joint depositors. If however the terms of the acceptance of the
deposit by the depositee stipulate that the name of the beneficial
owner shall alone be entered first then the presumptive beneficial
interest in favour of the first depositor might be assumed.
(309)
Departmental action and prosecution
No legal bar for simultaneous disciplinary
proceedings and criminal prosecution. Yet there
may be cases where it would be appropriate to differ
disciplinary proceedings awaiting disposal of the
criminal case.
Kusheshwar Dubey vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.
AIR 1988 SC 2118
The Supreme Court held that while there could be no legal
bar for simultaneous proceedings being taken against the delinquent
employee against whom disciplinary proceedings were initiated, yet,
there may be cases where it would be appropriate to defer disciplinary
proceedings awaiting disposal of the criminal case. In the latter class
of cases it would be open to the delinquent employee to seek such
an order of stay or injunction from the Court. Whether in the facts
and circumstances of a particular case there should or should not be
such simultaneity of the proceedings would then receive judicial
consideration and the court will decide in the given circumstances of
a particular case as to whether the disciplinary proceedings should
be interdicted, pending criminal trial. It is neither possible nor
advisable to evolve a hard and fast, straight jacket formula valid for
all cases and of general application without regard to the particularities
of the individual situation. In the instant case, the criminal action and
the disciplinary proceedings were grounded upon the same set of
facts and therefore the disciplinary proceedings could be stayed, in