High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Virendra Gupta v. The Chairman, Aligarh Gramin Bank Now Shreyas Gramin B.&Ors. - WRIT - A No. 70331 of 2006  RD-AH 432 (8 January 2007)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 70331 of 2006.
Virendra Gupta..................................................................... Petitioner.
The Chairman, Aligarh Gramin Bank, now Shreyas
Gramin Bank, Lal Diggi Road, Aligarh & another...................Respondents.
(Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amitava Lala and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Misra)
For the Petitioner : Sri Indra Mani Tripathi.
For the Respondents : Sri Yashwant Verma.
Amitava Lala, J.-- The contention of the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the order impugned being dated 07th December, 2006, annexure-9 to the writ petition, has been passed de hors the Article 38 (1)(b)(ii) Chapter IV of Shreyas Gramin Bank (Officers & Employees) Service Regulations-2000. Argument of learned Counsel for the petitioner is two fold. First one is that such regulation only came into effect on 01st June, 2006, there was no existence of the same in the year 2000; and secondly, no second show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner before imposing punishment.
Learned Counsel appearing for the bank contended before this Court that there is a scope of appeal, when the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that it is a question of law, therefore, alternative remedy is no bar.
However, we are of the view that Shreyas Gramin Bank has been formed by way of amalgamation of three banks i.e. Aligarh, Etah, Jamuna Gramin Banks and no regulation has been framed as yet. Therefore, it can be construed that Article 38 means original Article 38 applicable to Aligarh Gramin Bank. In that case it can be at best said to be bonafide mistake on the part of the Chairman. However, so far as the second show cause is concerned, that might be good point on the part of the petitioner but that too can be decided only by the appellate authority on the basis of filing of the appeal. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that since the Chairman has passed the impugned order and when he will head the appellate committee then the same result will come out.
In such circumstances, in disposing the writ petition we are of the view that the petitioner will approach the appellate authority and such appellate authority will not be headed by the Chairman, who issued the impugned order, but some other nominated person. However, such nominated person and the committee as a whole will have the independent capacity to determine the issue without being influenced by the order of the Chairman. If the appeal is filed within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, the appeal will be heard and decided after giving adequate opportunity of hearing and by passing a reasoned order thereon within a period of one month from the date of filing of appeal. All points are kept open for the purpose of determination by the appellate authority.
Thus, the writ petition stands disposed of.
However, no order is passed as to costs.
(Justice Amitava Lala)
(Justice Sanjay Misra)
Dt./- 08th January, 2007.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.