Ms. Manpreet Saini v. Bank Of Baroda
!"" #"
# """""" $%&'('
)
"""""# #
* + "
#
# +
# +, %-.%/ #0(123
! "
##$%##& ' " ( #) *) #* + .
*/
& *0 #* + 1!2 1 " ! 2 #******%.
+6 !
!2
!
1 !2 3 ,78/ 4
9&9 1 *: #* + 23
! )* *+ #* )* *0 #* + 1 #6
3 2!
23 2 1
&.%/ /453'
# ;
3
%4 .
'
3
) *+ #* 4
)* *+ #* *
3 ! 3 1 )* *+ #*
< 1 ,7=/ 4
9&9 )
#* 0 "= >
7 ( 2 ₹#******%.
?
#0 *& #* .0/ @ - 2 4
+ *+ #* 0 3 '
*+ * #* + .:/ 1 2 4A @ B2 1 ! 3 2 C 33
9 *# #* + .+/ 2
: *) #* +
1" 2 C 1 !( 2
#) *) #* + .
*/ !
3 3 ₹#******%.
1
+6 1 2 2 :
D ( 2 ( )* *0 #* + 3
( 3
3 3
!2
!
!2 3 4
1 3 !
! 063%63.06'
7%24-/ 0/ 32% 8%3.3.06%& + @
!3 3 3 ₹#******%.
1
+6 !2
!
3 !
! .2 "= >
7 3 2 3 - 1
1
1 2 *+ * #* + ( 2 2 3
3 3 !2 =
@
!3 = 1 ,7=/ 4
9&9
! 1 ! 2 2
3 ! )* *0 #* +
3 3 (
7%24-/ 0/ &%'8069%63:
46;
# @
!3 3 3 ₹#******%.
1 !
!
!
!. 3. #+ *0 #* .#/ 1
3 ( ' 33 2 1 1
!
2 3
) ! = 3
#
:
2 ' 1
!
2 ₹#******%.
3 3 32 . ' !2
@
2 %- )* *& #* .
/ 2 2
1 ( 1 1
3 4 33 - > 2 1 ( 3 %"
33 2
' 1 2 1
!
2 3 #******%.
:
D 3 #: *: #* 2 #+ *0 #* .#/ 1
%" 1
"
:
$ @
!3 = - 3
2 3 2 33 #) *) #* + 3 1 2 3 2 "= 32 1 4
&
,7=/ 4
9&9 !
3 2
( !
3 !
1 3 1
+ @
!3 3 ! ! 3 33 #) *) #* +
1
64-<'.'
%" 32 #******%.
+6 3
#+ *0 #* .#/ 2 )* *& #* .
/ 1 !
D %"
3 #: *: #*
#* (
1
1 32
1 3 3 E 1
##$ 3!
3
F
!
" E
! ! F Issue no. 1 Whether this Court should exercise writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to interfere with enforcement of a service bond voluntarily executed by the petitioner?
#
1
##$ '
3 ! 3 2 G
!""!#$
!$%& 3 1
##$
"7.
is apparent that the order passed by the High Court is on the face of it illegal and erroneous. It is true that many matters could be decided after referring to the contentions raised in the affidavits and counter affidavits, but that would hardly be ground for exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution in case of alleged breach of contract."
!
'(
)*
+
!"",#-
..-& 1 1
32 " 1 4 3!
!2
!
"29. However, while entertaining an objection as to the maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the court should bear in mind the fact that the power to issue prerogative writs under Article 226 of the Constitution is plenary in nature and is not limited by any other provisions of the Constitution. The High Court having regard to the facts of the case has discretion to entertain or not to entertain a writ petition. The Court has imposed upon itself certain restrictions in the exercise of this power [See: Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai & Ors. [1998 (8) SCC 1]. And this plenary right of the High Court to issue a prerogative writ will not normally be exercised by the Court to the exclusion of other available remedies unless such action of the State or its instrumentality is arbitrary and unreasonable so as to violate the constitutional mandate of Article 14 or for other valid and legitimate reasons, for which the court thinks it necessary to exercise the said jurisdiction."
##
- !
"
2 <
( 1
"
3 3
1 1
1
3
#) 3! 2
1
3
-3 1 2 !2
!
."
3 Issue no. 2 Whether the overseas posting bond dated 28.04.2014 is valid and enforceable, and whether the respondent-Bank was justified in invoking it upon the petitioner's resignation after repatriation? #0 #+ *0 #* 2 H"
2
3
3 2 2 3 3 2 3
:
#+ *0 #* .#/ 1 3
"If I fail for any reason including the termination of the service by resignation or otherwise, whether on completion of my overseas assignment as IBO at UK or during the course of such assignment as IBO or on completion of such successive overseas assignments as may in future be given to me by the Bank, or during the course thereof or having so taken up duties at any place in India fail to serve the Bank for a period of 3 years for any such reason or in the event of any breach of obligations assumed by me in terms of clause (2) & (3) above, I shall pay to the Bank a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/ (Rupees Twenty Lacs only)"
3 ₹ 1
!
2 , #******%./
2
"1 3
#:
4 ! !
1 2 !
3 3 2
! 2 !
1 3
3 - 3
1 - 3 3 !
4
'
+&# #$
2 4 &0 '
+&#
3
4 &0 1
1 "74. Compensation for breach of contract where penalty stipulated for : When a contract has been broken, if a sum is named in the contract as the amount to be paid in case of such breach, or if the contract contains any other stipulation by way of penalty, the party complaining of the breach is entitled, whether or not actual damage or loss is proved to have been caused thereby, to receive from the party who has broken the contract reasonable compensation not exceeding the amount so named or, as the case may be, the penalty stipulated for". 1 ! , G.3 3I/ !
32
!
- 4 &0 . ! !
3 2 #& ₹ #******%.
.3 3 "=
3 !
.3
3 2 3 G/ 0
($1%- $,".& "Section 74 declares the law as to liability upon breach of contract where compensation is by agreement of the parties predetermined, or where there is a stipulation by way of penalty."
#+ 71
! 1 2
" <
1
1 ! ! 3 3 Issue no. 3 Whether the petitioner is entitled to unconditional acceptance of resignation, relief from service, and release of terminal benefits despite the subsisting bond obligation?
29.
>
" 3 !3
3 2 32
1
3 !
3 - 3 3 2 )* Raj Kumar v. Union of India '
9$9
+* 1 1 ! "But where a public servant has invited by his letter of resignation determination of his employment, his services normally stand terminated from the date on which the letter of resignation is accepted by the appropriate authority and in the absence of any law or rule governing the conditions of his service to the contrary, it will not be open to the public servant to withdraw his resignation after it is accepted by the appropriate authority. Till the resignation is accepted by the appropriate authority in consonance with the rules governing the acceptance, the public servant concerned has locus paenitentiae but not thereafter.''
)
= 3
! !
2
1
!
3
! 1
! 2 3
)# !
2
2 32 H"
1 ! 3
3
3
)) 2 !2 3 )0 2
# +
!"" Meenu
E "% J %C # E !
J %C