K.Subraya Kamath v. The Chairman & Managing
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.12.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA Writ Petition No.32100 of 2017 K.Subraya Kamath
...Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Chairman & Managing Director No.21, Rajendra Place New Delhi 110 008 2.The General Manager HRD Department No.21, Rajendra Place New Delhi 110 008 3.The Deputy General Manager HRD Department No.21, Rajendra Place New Delhi 110 008 4.The Zonal Manager Zonal Office, 770-A, 1st Floor Spencer Towers, Anna Salai Chennai-600 002
...Respondents
Prayer :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents (a) to pay full salary to the petitioner from the date of dismissal to date of reinstatement/retirement i.e., from January 1995 to October 1995 approximately Rs.1,80,000/- (b) to pay the monetary benefits payable to the post of Officer in the Scale-I from the year 2002 to 2008, Scale-II from the year 2008 to 2011, Scale-III from 2011 to May, 2014; approximately Rs.20,00,000/- (C) to pay the withheld two increments from the date of suspension i.e., 17.10.1992 till the date of superannuation i.e.31.05.2014 amounting to Rs.6,00,000/- (approximately)(d) To refix the pension on the basis of the salary applicable to Senior Management Grade Scale-III;(e) to pay earned leave
encashment from 1.1.1992 to 17.10.1992 for 22 days per year amounting to Rs.60,000/-.
And pass such further orders as this Court deems fit. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Udhayakumar
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to pay full salary to the petitioner from the date of dismissal till the date of reinstatement.
2. On a perusal of typed set of papers filed in this Writ Petition, it is seen that the petitioner was dismissed from service by order dated 12.12.1994 passed by the Disciplinary Authority, against which, he preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority, which was also dismissed. Thereafter, he moved Mercy Petition before the 1st respondent.
While entertaining the Mercy Petition, the 1st respondent, evaluated the case in totality and after going through the records placed before him, had taken a sympathetic view and came to the conclusion that the punishment of dismissal from service requires modification. Finally, by order dated 11.10.1995, the petitioner was reinstated in service with two conditions, and the operative portion of the said order read as under:- "I, therefore, order that the punishment of Dismissal be modified to stoppage of his five annual increments with cumulative effect.
I further order that no difference of salary and other allowances shall be payable to him except for the subsistence allowance already paid to him for the suspension period. Further, he shall not be paid any salary for the period from the date of his dismissal till the date of joining his service as a consequence of this order. However, this period shall not be treated as break in his service.
Sh.K.Subraya Kamath is directed to report to Zonal Manager, Madras, for further duties. A copy of this order be sent to Sh.K.Subraya Kamath and another, Zonal Manager, Madras, for necessary compliance."
3. The first condition shows that the petitioner shall not be paid with any salary for the period from the date of his dismissal till the date of joining his service as a consequence of the said order. The said order was not put to challenge till date. While so, the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to pay full salary from the date of dismissal till
the date of his reinstatement is wholly misconceived and the same cannot be granted.
4. The second part of the prayer sought by the petitioner as regards monetary benefits payable to the Post of Officer in the Scale-I from the year 2002 to 2008, Scale-II from the year 2008 to 2011, Scale-III from 2011 to May, 2014, also cannot be entertained since they are all time barred. The petitioner, on reaching the age of superannuation, on 31.05.2014, was allowed to retire from service. The Petitioner herein, keeping quite for three long years, has come before this court, seeking extensive prayer. In my considered view, the petitioner, who was reinstated in service by order dated 11.10.1995, accepted the said order without challenge and worked in the respondentBank till May 2014 and on attaining the age of superannuation, retired from service on 31.05.2014, but, now preferred this Writ Petition with a delay of more than three years. At the threshold, on the ground of delay and laches, the prayer of the petitioner cannot be entertained. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar nvsri To 1.The Chairman & Managing Director No.21, Rajendra Place New Delhi 110 008 2.The General Manager HRD Department No.21, Rajendra Place New Delhi 110 008 3.The Deputy General Manager HRD Department No.21, Rajendra Place New Delhi 110 008
4.The Zonal Manager Zonal Office, 770-A, 1st Floor Spencer Towers, Anna Salai Chennai-600 002 +1 cc Mr.S.Udhaya kumar Advocate sr 88447 Writ Petition No.32100 of 2017 aa05/01/2018