Bombay High Court
Shridhar Rukka Anchan vs Dena Bank And 3 Others on 14 June, 2022
Bench: Makarand Subhash Karnik
7-oswp850-2017
AGK
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 850 OF 2017
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 13275 OF 2022
Shridhar Rukka Anchan ...Petitioner
V/s.
Dena Bank & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Burhan V. Bukhari for the petitioner/applicant.
Mr. Vishal Talsania with Mr. N. N. Gawade i/by M/s.
Sanjay Udeshi & Co., for respondent nos. 1 to 3
and for proposed respondent no. 5.
CORAM: DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ &
M. S. KARNIK, J.
DATE: JUNE 14, 2022
P.C.:
1. Dena Bank, respondent no.1, had employed the
petitioner as cashier-cum-clerk. Thereafter, the petitioner was
promoted to the post of Officer in Junior Management Grade
Pay Scale I in 1991.
2. While the petitioner was so employed, his disciplinary
authority initiated disciplinary proceedings. Such proceedings
culminated in a final order dated 16th August 2002 whereby
the petitioner was dismissed from service. Questioning the
order of the disciplinary authority, the petitioner presented an
appeal dated 3rd October 2002 before the appellate authority,
7-oswp850-2017
received by it on 4th October 2002. The appeal was, however,
not decided by the appellate authority.
3. Simultaneously, the petitioner had been prosecuted in a
criminal proceeding for committing offences under sections
120-B read with sections 409, 477-A, 201 of the Indian Penal
Code read with section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988. Having faced trial, the petitioner has
since been acquitted by a judgment and order of the Special
Judge (C.B.I.), Greater Bombay dated 30th August 2012.
4. On 27th August 2015, the petitioner invoked the writ
jurisdiction of this Court by instituting this writ petition
wherein he prayed for quashing of the order of dismissal
dated 16th August 2002 as well as a show-cause notice dated
30th January 2014, whereby forfeiture of the employer's
contribution to the provident fund was proposed.
5. During the pendency of the writ petition, Dena Bank has
merged with Bank of Baroda. In view of such merger, Dena
Bank has no independent existence as of today. We grant
leave to the petitioner to add Bank of Baroda as respondent
no. 5. Amendment be carried out in the cause-title of the writ
petition forthwith.
6. Turning attention to the merits of the petitioner's claim,
we see no reason to examine his challenge to the order of
dismissal dated 16th August 2002 in view of non-disposal of
the appeal filed against such order on 4th October 2022.
However, at this stage, Mr. Talsania, learned advocate for
Bank of Baroda submits that since the appeal was presented
on 4th October 2002 before the appellate authority of Dena
7-oswp850-2017
Bank and such appeal may not be traceable, the petitioner
may be granted liberty to file a fresh appeal, raising all points
that were raised in such appeal as well as any point available
to him now.
7. We find such submission to be fair and reasonable.
8. Accordingly, we dispose of this writ petition granting
liberty to the petitioner to present an appeal against the order
of dismissal dated 16th August 2002 before the competent
appellate authority of Bank of Baroda, within a period of three
(3) weeks from date. In the event of presentation of such an
appeal within three (3) weeks, the competent appellate
authority shall not dismiss the appeal on the ground of
limitation but proceed to decide the same on merits and in
accordance with law. All contentions are left open to be urged
by the petitioner in the appeal. There shall be no order as to
costs.
9. In view of the aforesaid order, the interim application
also stands disposed of.
Digitally
(M. S. KARNIK, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)
signed by
ATUL
ATUL GANESH
GANESH KULKARNI
KULKARNI Date:
2022.06.15
18:48:29
+0530
