Dismissed

Narendra S/O Ramdas Khandare and Others v. State Bank of India Officers Association, Mumbai through General Secretary and Others

Bombay HC17 Sept 2019WP/6357/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging an association's bye-laws disqualifying strikers from elections. The court held that the petitioners must first exhaust the remedy under the Bye-laws regarding the factual question of absence before challenging the clause's validity.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with an admonition to exhaust the remedy under Clause 39.

Narendra S/O Ramdas Khandare and Others Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2019)

Order

1709wp6357.19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 6357/2019.

¶6

Narendra Ramdas Khandare and others

¶7

-VERSUS-

¶8

State Bank of India Officers Association and others.

¶9

Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders
or directions and Registrar’s orders.

¶10

Shri T.D. Mandlekar, Advocate for Petitioners.
Shri A.M. Joshi, A.G.P. for Respondent No.3.

¶11

CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE & VINAY JOSHI, JJ.

¶12

DATE : SEPTEMBER 17, 2019.

¶13

Heard.

¶14

2.The disputed question of fact is, as to
whether petitioners, as members of State Bank of India
Officers Association willfully absented themselves from
participating in any agitational program organized by
the Association and their Unit especially the strike call,
so as to become eligible to contest the election.

¶15

3.There is a remedy provided under Clause
39 of the Bye-laws and Rules of the State Bank of India
Officers Association (Mumbai Metro and Maharashtra

Order

1709wp6357.19

Circle). Petitioners submit that Clause 6, which makes
them ineligible to contest the election itself is
violative of Articles 19[1][c] and [g] of the
Constitution of India.

¶20

4.The question of validity of the Clause can
be considered later on, and if a decision on factual
aspect goes in favour of petitioners before the
adjudicating officer under Clause 39, there would not
be any occasion to challenge the validity of the said
clause. We are therefore, of the view that petitioners
must exhaust the remedy as provided under Clause 39

¶21

of the Bye-laws and Rules. Obviously, the authority
shall decide the matter in accordance with law by
following the principles of natural justice.

¶22

5.Writ Petition is dismissed. However, all

¶23

questions are kept open. No costs.

¶24

JUDGE JUDGE

¶25

Rgd.

Narendra S/O Ramdas Khandare and Others v. State Bank of India Officers Association, Mumbai through General Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra S/O Ramdas Khandare and Others v. State Bank of India Officers Association, Mumbai through General Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Dattatraya Sansthan Shikhar Mahur through Secretary Shri. Ganesh Tukaram Patil Vs State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary, Revenue and Foerest Department, Mumbai and Others

Vilas S/O Dadaji Ramteke Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mumbai and 3 Others

Ku. Prerna Bapurao Bahe Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Mumbai and Other

Dattu S/O Damodhar Sawarbandhe and Others Vs State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Bhandara and Others

M/S Shree Om Enterprises, Nagpur Thr. Its Prop. Marotrao Rajaram Motghare Vs Chairman, Appellate Auth., Mumbai Thr. Principal/Additional Chief Sec., Environment Dept., and Anr.

Smt. Kalapana W/O Vishwasrao Khandare Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secretary, Forest and Revenue Department, Mumbai and Other