Disposed¶38

Sri H Vasu Shetty v. M/S Union Bank of India

Karnataka HC15 Sept 2025WP/6037/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru (NC: 2025:KHC:36531); WP No. 6037 of 2021 (S-R); Justice H.T. Narendra Prasad; order dated 15.09.2025. Union Bank of India; pensionary benefits; dismissal from service dated 29.11.2018; alleged misappropriation of Rs.15 Lakhs recovered from gratuity; representations Annexures-E and E1; Annexure-A No.52360/STAFF/2019-20 dated 22.01.2020; writ of mandamus; petition disposed of without merits; eight-week direction to consider representations.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.1-Bank to consider the petitioner's representations at Annexures-E and E1 in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, and in any event not later than eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order; no opinion expressed on the merits. ¶38

Sri H Vasu Shetty Vs M/S Union Bank of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶38

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No.1 is to be directed to consider the petitioner's representation and take further action as per Annexure-A bearing No.52360/STAFF/2019-20 dated 22.01.2020 issued by the 3rd respondent. +1 more

¶24

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of, directing respondent No.1-Bank to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner at Annexure-E and E1 in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible.

¶39

Ratio / Principle

The consideration of the petitioner's representations at Annexure-E and E1 is to be completed in any event not later than eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (S-R) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner, formerly employed with Union Bank of India, was dismissed from service vide dismissal order dated 29.11.2018 for alleged misappropriation of bank funds to the tune of Rs.15 Lakhs, which amount was recovered by the Bank from the gratuity payable to him. His subsequent representations (Annexures-E and E1) seeking release of pensionary benefits were not considered by the Bank, prompting this petition seeking a mandamus to consider the representation and take further action as per Annexure-A bearing No.52360/STAFF/2019-20 dated 22.01.2020 issued by the 3rd respondent, and to clear all pensionary benefits from 01.12.2018. On the submission of the respondents-Bank's counsel that the Bank would consider the representations if granted time, the High Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits, disposed of the petition directing respondent No.1-Bank to consider the representations at Annexures-E and E1 in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, and in any event not later than eight weeks from receipt of certified copy of the order.

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:36531 WP No. 6037 of 2021

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6037 OF 2021 (S-R)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI H VASU SHETTY S/O LATE VADHU SHETTY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT NO.3275, GANESHA KRUPA 21^ST B MAIN ROAD VIJAYANAGAR 2^ND STAGE MYSORE-570017.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI.H S SHANKAR., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

M/S UNION BANK OF INDIA NO.239, UNION BANK BHAVAN VIDHAN BHAVAN MARG MUMBAI-400021 REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN.

¶12

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A 2. M/S UNION BANK OF INDIA Location: HIGH NO.10-A, CHANDRAKIRAN COURTOF KASTURBA ROAD KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560 001 REP BY ITS MANAGER.

¶13

M/S UNION BANK OF INDIA HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 1ST FLOOR SATISH TRADERS, SANGAM ROAD KNS CIRCLE, KANAKAPURA RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562117 REP BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. T P MUTHANNA., ADVOCATE RESPONDENTS)

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:36531 WP No. 6037 of 2021

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION VIDE ANNEXURE-A BEARING NO: 52360/STAFF/2019-20 DATED: 22.01.2020 ISSUED BY THE R-3 AND ETC.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:

¶24

a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction thereby directing the respondent No.1 to consider the representation of the petitioner and take further action as per Annexure-A bearing No.52360/STAFF/2019-20 dated 22.01.2020 issued by the 3^rd respondent.

¶25

b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction thereby directing the respondents to

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:36531 WP No. 6037 of 2021

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

clear all the pensionary benefits due to the petitioner from 01.12.2018 to till date.

¶29

c) Pass such other order/s, direction/s as this Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit under the circumstances of the case in the best interest of justice and equity.

¶30

The petitioner was employed with the respondentsBank. While the petitioner was in service, he was dismissed from service vide dismissal order dated 29.11.2018 for allegations of misappropriation of bank funds to the tune of Rs.15 Lakhs. The said amount of Rs.15 Lakhs has been recovered by the respondents-Bank from the Gratuity amount payable to the petitioner. Subsequently, the petitioner has submitted his representations at Annexures-E and E1 seeking release of his pensionary benefits. Since the respondents-Bank has not considered the representations of the petitioner, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶31

At this stage, the learned counsel for the respondents-Bank submitted that if this Court grants some

¶32

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC:36531 WP No. 6037 of 2021

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

reasonable time, the respondent No.1-Bank will consider the representations of the petitioner at Annexure-E and

¶36

E1, in accordance with law.

¶37

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion

¶38

on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶39

Respondent No.1-Bank is directed to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner at Annexure-E and E1, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, and in any event, not later than eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶40

Sd/(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

¶41

DM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 39

Sri H Vasu Shetty v. M/S Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri H Vasu Shetty v. M/S Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Damayanthi Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Anusuyamma Vs Smt Parvathamma

Dr. B M Mohan Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr S Pradeep Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Gous Inamdar, Vs Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board

Mahadevu Vs Mysore City Corporation