Disposed

Sukumar Dey Sarkar v. State Bank of India and Ors.

Calcutta HC12 Jul 2022WPA/10487/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order directing SBI to adjudicate a petitioner's pending appeal for reconsideration of a recovery from retirement benefits within a stipulated time frame, issued without respondent presence.

What did the court decide?

Direction to SBI to dispose of the appeal by passing a reasoned order within 31st August 2022 after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing.

Sukumar Dey Sarkar Vs State Bank of India… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

12.07.2022 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ML-64 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION (PP) APPELLATE SIDE

¶2

WPA 10487 of 2022

¶3

Sukumar Dey Sarkar Vs. State Bank of India & Ors.

¶4

Mr. Kishore Mukherjee

¶5

….for the petitioner. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.

¶6

The petitioner was an employee of State Bank of India (in short “SBI”) and retired from the services on attaining the age of superannuation on 31^st January, 2019. At the time of retirement, it was found that the petitioner had made certain excess payment to the constituent of the bank, as a result whereof a sum of Rs.1,75,469/- was deducted from the retiral benefits of the petitioner by way of recovery. The petitioner had made an appeal for reconsideration of the deduction. The appeal has been filed on 26^th February, 2020, but has not been heard as of date, according to the petitioner.

¶7

The respondents remain unrepresented.

¶8

However, in view of the nature of the order I intend to pass, the matter is taken up in the absence of the respondents.

¶9

After hearing the petitioner and considering the materials on record, I find that justice will be sub-

¶10

¶11

served if I direct the competent authority of SBI, being the respondent no.4, to dispose of the petitioner’s appeal made on 26^th February, 2020, which was addressed to the Regional Manager, SBI, Regional Business Office-2, Zonal Office Kolkata, Jeevandeep Building, 1, Middlenton St., Kolkata – 700071 (appearing at page 12 of the writ petition) since the same has been sent to him for adjudication.

¶12

The respondent no.4, after giving the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of hearing, shall dispose of the appeal by passing a reasoned order within 31^st August, 2022. The reasoned order that may be passed shall be communicated to the petitioner immediately upon the same being passed.

¶13

The parties including the respondent no.4 shall act on the basis of a server copy of this order without insisting upon production of a certified copy thereof.

¶14

Since the respondents remain unrepresented, the learned advocate for the petitioner is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the respondent no.4 along with the copy of the writ petition containing the appeal within a period of 7 days from date.

¶15

Nothing further remains to be adjudicated in this writ petition. The same is disposed of accordingly without any order as to costs.

¶16

¶17

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of necessary formalities.

¶18

( Arindam Mukherjee, J. )

Sukumar Dey Sarkar v. State Bank of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukumar Dey Sarkar v. State Bank of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun Deuri and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Dhananjoy Mahata and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Suranjit Biswas Vs Union of India and Ors.

Karamjit Adhikari and Another Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Susanta Das Vs Punjab National Bank and Ors.

Gopal Kanjilal Vs Union of India and Ors.