State Bank of India Vs. Pralayasaran Chakrabarty
EmailAppeal: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1137 OF 1999
(From the Judgment and Order dated 5.5 90 of the Assam High Court in W.A.No.84 of 1996)
(Arising out of SLP @ NO.10356/1998)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 5.5 90 of the Assam High Court in W.A.No.84 of 1996)
(Arising out of SLP @ NO.10356/1998)
Petitioner: State Bank of India
Respondent: Pralayasaran Chakrabarty
Apeal: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1137 OF 1999
(From the Judgment and Order dated 5.5 90 of the Assam High Court in W.A.No.84 of 1996)
(Arising out of SLP @ NO.10356/1998)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 5.5 90 of the Assam High Court in W.A.No.84 of 1996)
(Arising out of SLP @ NO.10356/1998)
Judges: B.N.Kirpal & S.Rajendra Babu, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Mar 26, 1999
Appearances:
Harish N.Salva Kapur & Ms.Shubhra Kapur,Advs.with him for the appellant
In person for Respondent
In person for Respondent
Head Note:
CONSTITUTION LAW
Article 136 – Interference by Supre Court – High Court directing Deputy Managing Director of Bank to take decision onvoluntary retirement and revoeation of notice of voluntary retirement, apart from promotion, salary and allowances. Held that the case does not require any interference under Art. 136.
JUDGEMENT:
KIRPAL, J.
1. We neared counsel for the appellant and the respondent in person.
2. While allowing the write appeal filed by the respondent the High Court passed the following order:
” In the result,we dispose of this appeal by directing that the Deputy Managing Director (Personnel),Central Office ,State Bank of India will take decisions on the voluntary retirement of the appellant and his promotion and his salary and allowances keep-ing in mind the observations made in this Judgment as well as the notice dated 27.6.94 of appellant revoking his notice to retire voluntarily from service. The said decisions will be taken by said competent authority within two months from today and the amounts paid to the appellant pursuant to interim orders passed by this Court will be adjusted against the salary of terminal benefits of the appellant, as the case may be.”
3. Taking all the facts and circumstances into consideration we do not think that it is appropriate in this case to interfere with the judgment of the High Court in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution. The appeal is dismissed. No costs.
1. We neared counsel for the appellant and the respondent in person.
2. While allowing the write appeal filed by the respondent the High Court passed the following order:
” In the result,we dispose of this appeal by directing that the Deputy Managing Director (Personnel),Central Office ,State Bank of India will take decisions on the voluntary retirement of the appellant and his promotion and his salary and allowances keep-ing in mind the observations made in this Judgment as well as the notice dated 27.6.94 of appellant revoking his notice to retire voluntarily from service. The said decisions will be taken by said competent authority within two months from today and the amounts paid to the appellant pursuant to interim orders passed by this Court will be adjusted against the salary of terminal benefits of the appellant, as the case may be.”
3. Taking all the facts and circumstances into consideration we do not think that it is appropriate in this case to interfere with the judgment of the High Court in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution. The appeal is dismissed. No costs.
