Disposed

S. Balamurugan v. Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Ltd.

Madras HC26 Nov 2020WP(MD)/20633/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment holds that writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against private banks, including matters regarding employment dismissal, are not maintainable as private employers are not bound by writ jurisdiction. The High Court disposed of the petition directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate civil forum, noting that the long pendency of the petition should be condoned by that forum. No costs awarded.

What did the court decide?

No costs awarded. Petitioner directed to approach appropriate civil forum.

S. Balamurugan Vs Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Ltd. — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.20633 of 2013

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 26.11.2020

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.20633 of 2013

¶7

S.Balamurugan ... Petitioner -Vs-

¶8

1.Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Limited, Rep. by its General Manager, 57 V.E. Road, Thoothukudi 628 002.

¶9

2.The Deputy General Manager, Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank Limited, 57 V.E. Road, Thoothukudi 628 002.

¶10

3.The Assistant General Manager, Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank Limited,

¶11

57 V.E. Road, Thoothukudi 628 002. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the first respondent dated 01.03.2011 and the orders of the second respondent, dated 03.09.2010 and orders of the third respondent in Rec.ST.Dis.198.Bala.Cor.007/2009-10, dated 31.07.2010 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner as Assistant Manager in the respondent bank with all arrears of salary from the date of dismissal till the date of reinstatement with all monetary and other attendant benefits.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The order impugned is passed by the Management of the Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank Limited. The respondent bank is a Private Bank and therefore, the writ petition cannot be entertained at all. The petitioner is bound to approach the appropriate forum for the purpose of redressal of his grievances. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

1/2

¶16

W.P.(MD).No.20633 of 2013

¶17

In view of the fact that the writ petition is pending for long years, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the appropriate forum and in the event of such approach, the period in which, the writ petition is pending may be condoned and the writ petition may be entertained on merits by the appropriate forum concerned.

¶18

3.With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar (RTI)

¶21

// True Copy //

¶22

/ /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶23

sji

¶24

W.P.(MD).No.20633 of 2013 26.11.2020

¶25

KG(CO) AP(08/12/2020) 2P 1C

¶26

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶27

2/2

S. Balamurugan v. Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Balamurugan v. Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Ltd.

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

M.Innas, Head Constable 730/KK Vs the Govt. of Tamil Nadu

R.Chellaiah, Vs Rural Development Dept. of

S.R. Krishnakumar, Vs State of Tamil Nadu

S.Dhuraisamy, Vs the Director of Town

The Tamilnadu Government Vs the Government of Tamilnadu

V.Karl Marx, Fireman No. 6508, Vs the District Officer