Allowed

Bhupendra Dama v. Udaipur Central Coop.Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Rajasthan HC16 Nov 2018CW/1234/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justice Arun Bhansali allowed the writ petition of Assistant Manager Bhupendra Dama, quashing an impugned order passed by respondents for violation of natural justice and Service Conditions, 2008, relying on Nand Lal Gadri.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 10.1.2018 is quashed and set aside. Petitioner entitled to consequential benefits within three weeks.

Bhupendra Dama Vs Udaipur Central Coop.Bank Ltd… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ No. 1234/2018

¶3

Bhupendra Dama S/o Shri Ganesh Lal Dama, Resident Of Village Sada, Post Nichli Sigra, Panchayat Samiti Phalasiya, Tehsil Jhadol, District Udaipur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Udaipur Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Through Its Managing Director, Head Office, Bapu Bazar, Udaipur.

¶7

Executive Officer, Udaipur Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. Udaipur.

¶8

Jhadol Circle Agriculture Multipurpose Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Jhadol Panchayat Samiti Through Its President.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Mutha. For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.K. Sinha.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Order

¶12

16/11/2018

¶13

Learned counsel for the parties submit that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by judgment in the case of Nand Lal Gadri v. Registrar Cooperative Societies & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2933/2016 , decided on 2.12.2016 and therefore, the present writ petition may also be decided in terms of the said judgment.

¶14

In the case of Nand Lal Gadri (supra), it was inter alia laid down and directed as under:-

¶15

“It is not in dispute that the petitioner is a regularly appointed Assistant Manager in the respondent-Samiti vide Annex.-7. Once the petitioner is regularly appointed, he is governed by the Service Conditions, 2008, which as noticed hereinbefore under Part-8 deals with the disciplinary matters and appeals therefrom.

¶16

Admittedly, the respondents have not followed

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CW-1234/2018]

¶19

the procedure as prescribed under Service Conditions 2008 and have chosen to pass the order in violation of the said Services Conditions, 2008.

¶20

In view thereof, the action of the respondents in passing the order dated 01.02.2016 (Annex.-9) cannot be sustained being in violation of principles of natural justice and the Service Conditions, 2008.

¶21

In view of the above discussion, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The order dated 01.02.2016 (Annex.-9) is quashed and set aside.

¶22

However, it would be open for the respondents to take appropriate proceedings in accordance with law including the provisions of Service Conditions, 2008.

¶23

It goes without saying that on account of quashing of the order dated 01.02.2016 (Annex.-9), the petitioner would be entitled to all consequential benefits, which shall be accorded to the petitioner within a period of three weeks from the date of this order.”

¶24

In view of the submissions made, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The order dated 10.1.2018 (Annex.5) is quashed and set aside. It would be open for the respondents to take appropriate proceedings in accordance with law including the provisions of Service Conditions, 2008.

¶25

It goes without saying that on account of quashing of the order dated 10.1.2018 (Annex.5), the petitioner would be entitled to all consequential benefits, which shall be accorded to the petitioner within a period of three weeks from the date of this order.

¶26

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶27

sumit-60

Bhupendra Dama v. Udaipur Central Coop.Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhupendra Dama v. Udaipur Central Coop.Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mana Ram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Rajkumar Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Ganpat Singh Chouhan Vs State of Rajasthan

Maghar Singh Vs Union of India and Anr.

Bhaga Ram Dangi Vs State of Rajasthan

Nagma Vs State of Rajasthan