Disposed

Sheikh Mohammad Ansari v. Jharkhand Gramin Bank Head Office Ranchi Through Its Chairman And Ors.

Jharkhand HC10 Jul 2019WPC/7382/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposed of a writ petition claiming gratuity, arrears, and compensatory salary. The Court held that due to uncalculated financial loss under bank regulations and the Gratuity Act, the Bank must calculate the loss and pay any remaining balance within three months, while rejecting other claims as not legally tenable.

What did the court decide?

Bank must calculate financial loss caused by misconduct and pay the remaining gratuity within three months; petition disposed otherwise.

Sheikh Mohammad Ansari Vs Jharkhand Gramin… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P. (S) No. 7382 of 2017

¶3

… …Petitioner -Versus-

¶4

Sheikh Mohammad Ansari.

¶5

Jharkhand Gramin Bank Head Office Ranchi through its Chairman, having its office at Rajendra Place, 5, Main Road Ranchi, P.O. G.P.O. Ranchi, P.S. Chutia, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶6

General Manager, Jharkhand Gramin Bank Head Office Ranchi, having its office at Rajendra Place, 5, Main Road Ranchi P.O. GPO Ranchi P.S. Chutia, Dist. Ranchi.

¶7

Regional Manager, Jharkhand Gramin Bank Gumla Region having its office at Baraik Muhalla Jaspur Road Gumla, P.O. & P.S. Gumla District-Gumla, Jharkhand.

¶8

Branch Manager, Jharkhand Gramin Bank the then Kutmakachhar Branch now merged with Kinkel Branch having its office at P.O. Kinkel P.S. Kurdeg, District-Simdega, Jharkhand.

¶9

Branch Manager, Jharkhand Gramin Chatti Branch having its Office at & P.O. Chatti, P.S. Bhandra, Dist. Lohardagga, Jharkhand. … … …Respondents

¶10

¶11

CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S.N.PATHAK

¶12

For the Petitioner :Mr. Sahadeo Choudhary, Advocate. For the Respondents :Mr.Abdul Allam, Sr. Advocate.

¶13

¶14

09/ 10.07.2019 The petitioner has knocked the door of this Court for payment of the

¶15

following dues:-

¶16

i. Gratuity.

¶17

ii. Salary and other admissible dues for the period of April, 1988 to December, 1992 pertaining to Chatti Branch.

¶18

iii. Compensatory salary amount of Kutmakachhar Branch for dual charge (both as Branch Manager and Cashier) for the period from March, 1997 to August, 1998.

¶19

iv. Other payable compensatory amount.

¶20

The case of the petitioner lies in a narrow compass. The petitioner was posted at Chatti Branch as Manager for the period from 09.05.1988 to 14.04. 1989. He was put under suspension on 14.04.1989 and after holding departmental enquiry into the matter, he was dismissed from service on 12.11.1993. The petitioner preferred appeal before the Appellate Authority on 09.12.1993. The Board of Directors of the Respondent Bank modified

¶21

¶22

the order of dismissal and imposed consolidated penalty of “Degradation in his incremental scale by four stages. Subsequently after modification of the order of dismissal, the petitioner was reinstated into the service and posted at Kersai Branch on 21.12.1993. Again on 31.08.1998 for absence from duty, petitioner was put under suspension. The petitioner was again dismissed from service on 11.01.2000 following the due proceedings. The petitioner preferred appeal. The order of dismissal was affirmed by the Appellate Authority . The petitioner challenged orders of disciplinary authority as well as Appellate Authority before this Court in W.P.(S) No.2895 of 2001, which was dismissed vide order dated 07.02.2003. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, the petitioner preferred appeal before the Division Bench in L.P.A.No.161 of 2003 which also stood dismissed vide order dated 06.05.2003. The petitioner has also preferred S.L.P. and the same also stood dismissed. As the petitioner was not paid the benefits of salary of the period of suspension and also amount of gratuity as well as compensatory amount of holding dual charge, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

¶23

Mr. Sahadeo Choudhary, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as per the regulation of the Bank, the petitioner is entitled for gratuity as well as other reliefs prayed for. Learned Counsel further argues that petitioner is also entitled for compensatory amount of the period during which he was holding dual charge i.e. for the period from April, 1988 to December, 1992 which he has been denied illegally.

¶24

Mr. Sahadeo Choudhary further argued that in absence of any Rule for holding dual charge, respondent-authorities have illegally denied the benefits payable to petitioner for holding dual charge and when they have taken work from him, he is entitled for salary for both posts.

¶25

Per contra counter-affidavit has been filed.

¶26

Mr. A. Allam, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. Mayank Sahay vehemently opposes the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. A. Allam, learned Sr. Counsel at the very outset submits that writ petition itself is not maintainable as the petitioner has knocked the door of this Court after 22 years of dismissal. No writ petition can be entertained for

¶27

¶28

relief after 22 years. On merit also, learned Counsel submits that petitioner is not entitled for any relief as there is no Rule for payment of compensatory amount on holding of dual charge. Learned Counsel further argued that even the petitioner is not entitled for salary of the suspension period as the petitioner was dismissed from service twice and the same has been affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court and also by the Hon’ble Apex Court. In that view of the matter, he is not entitled for any relief. The order of dismissal has attained finality and as per law a dismissed employee is entitled for P.F. amount only.

¶29

Be that as it may, having heard the Counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that admittedly the petitioner has approached this Court after 22 long years. The petitioner has claimed for several reliefs. However, as far as gratuity is concerned regulation of the Bank is very clear. Rule 72 of the Staff Service Regulations of Ranchi Kshetriya Gramin Bank talks of gratuity:

¶30

“Termination of service in any other way except by way of punishment after completion of 10 years of service: Provided that in respect of an employee there shall be no forfeiture of gratuity for dismissal on account of misconduct except in cases where such misconduct causes financial loss to the bank and in that case to that extent only.”

¶31

Admittedly, the petitioner has caused financial loss to the Bank. As per the Rule where such misconduct causes financial loss to the Bank and in that case to that extent only meaning thereby the entitlement of the petitioner and the loss to the Bank shall be calculated and the rest amount shall be paid to the petitioner. Since it has not been calculated what was the loss to the Bank, the same finds strength from Rule 4 (6) (a) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, the Gratuity of an employee, whose services have been terminated for any act, wilful omission or negligence causing any damage or loss to, or destruction of property belonging to the employer, shall be forfeited to the extent of the damage or loss so caused .

¶32

From perusal of Rule, it appears that Staff Service Regulations of the Bank and also payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Rule 4 (6) (a) is very clear on the point that gratuity is payable after adjustment of losses. However, in the

¶33

¶34

instant case since the same has not been calculated it is open for the Bank to calculate the same and pay the rest amount, if any. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents submits that as the petitioner has approached this Court after 22 long years, he is not even entitled for the gratuity. When regulation speaks of making the payment on account of delay also, his rights cannot be forfeited. It was obligatory on the part of the respondents to pay the amount even if it is not asked for. As far as other reliefs are concerned, the petitioner is not entitled for the same in view of the settled principle of law. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh representation before the respondents regarding gratuity and upon receipt of the same the respondent authority of the Bank shall take conscious decision and pass a reasoned order and if the petitioner is found entitled for the amount of gratuity in view of the regulation of the Bank and also taking into account Rule 4(6) (a) of the Gratuity Act, the said amount after calculation shall be disbursed to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶35

Needless to say if it is found that the petitioner is not entitled for any amount, the same shall be communicated to the petitioner within a further period of two weeks.

¶36

Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶37

P.K.S.

Sheikh Mohammad Ansari v. Jharkhand Gramin Bank Head Office Ranchi Through Its Chairman And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheikh Mohammad Ansari v. Jharkhand Gramin Bank Head Office Ranchi Through Its Chairman And Ors.

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

Mosamat Ful Devi Vs Education

Kumari Ranju Vs Education

Lalita Oraon Vs Social Welfare Women And Child Development Dept

Pradeep Kumar Sharma Vs Jharkhand Urja Utpadan Nigam Limited through Its Managing Director

Rakesh Ranjan Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary

Ram Narayan Rajak And Ors. Vs Agriculture Department