Disposed

Syndicate Farmers Service Co-operative Society Ltd. v. The Syndicate Bank

Telangana HC8 Feb 2013WP/19880/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A common order dismissing writ petitions filed by societies challenging the withdrawal of Syndicate Bank officers. The court extended the interim continuation of officers for four more months but established a final withdrawal date of June 9, 2013.

What did the court decide?

Extension of interim order allowing Bank Officers to continue as Managing Directors till 8th June, 2013, with final withdrawal effective 9th June, 2013.

Syndicate Farmers Service Co-operative Society Ltd… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition Nos.19880, 19881 and 20801 of

2012

Date: 08.02.2013

Common Order:

These three Writ Petitions are filed feeling aggrieved by separate but identical communications issued by respondent No.2 whereby he has informed the petitioners- Societies that the Syndicate Bank (for short ‘the Bank’) has taken a decision to withdraw its Officers deputed to those Societies as Managing Directors, with a request to them to make their own arrangements for managing their respective businesses.

¶6

The main grievance of the petitioners is that the sudden withdrawal of the Officers of the Bank has left them in a lurch as it was not easy for them to find effective substitutes for managing their affairs.

¶7

A detailed counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, wherein they have emphasized on the fact that because of the shortage of the Officers in the Bank, lending their services to the petitioners has been affecting the smooth functioning of the Bank.

¶8

This Court, while admitting the Writ Petitions on 04-07-2012, has granted interim order whereunder it has directed continuance of the Officers of the Bank for a period of six months with the further direction that within this period, the petitioners shall take steps to make arrangements for appointment of the Managing Directors on their own accord. The period of six months has come to an end around the first week of January, 2013.

¶9

Sri Y.V. Ravi Prasad, learned Counsel for the petitioners, submitted that in spite of their best efforts,

¶10

his clients could not secure the suitable substitutes and that the period of six months may be extended by four more months, so that, the petitioners will make all out efforts to secure the substitute Officers. He has further undertaken that under no circumstances, the petitioners will come forward with a request for further extension. Having heard Sri A. Krishnam Raju, learned Standing Counsel for Syndicate Bank, I find the request of the learned Counsel for the petitioners reasonable. Therefore, the Writ Petitions are disposed of in the following terms:

¶11

(i) The Officers of the Bank, who are deputed to the petitioners- Societies as Managing Directors, shall be continued as such till 8^th June, 2013 and

¶12

(ii) whether the petitioners make alternative arrangements for posting substitutes for the deputationists or not, the Bank is entitled to withdraw its officers with effect from 9^th June 2013, and the petitioners are not entitled to seek any further extension of the deputation of the officers of the Bank.

¶13

As a sequel to disposal of these Writ Petitions, interlocutory applications pending, if any, stand disposed of.

¶14

_______________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

¶15

Dt: 08-02-2013 SKA/LUR

Syndicate Farmers Service Co-operative Society Ltd. v. The Syndicate Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syndicate Farmers Service Co-operative Society Ltd. v. The Syndicate Bank

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

Mohd. Khaleel-ur-Rahman Vs The Public Information Officer

Mirza Bahbood Ali Baig Vs The District Collector

Veginaty Osura Reddy, S/o. Guruva Reddy Vs The Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration and

K. Balaji, Vs The District Collector

D.M.Abu Mohammed Vs Government of India., rep.by its secretary

M/s. Siddhardha Constructions (Pvt.) Ltd., Vs The Principal Chief Engineer