Delhi High Court
Firoz Ahmad vs Sh Dinesh Kumar Khara & Anr. on 19 February, 2024
Author: Tushar Rao Gedela
Bench: Tushar Rao Gedela
$~48
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 19.02.2024
+ CONT.CAS(C) 288/2024, CM APPL. 9961/2024 & CM APPL.
9962/2024
FIROZ AHMAD ..... Petitioner
versus
SH DINESH KUMAR KHARA & ANR. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : In person.
For the Respondents : Mr. Rajiv Kapur and Mr. Akshit Kapur,
Advocates for SBI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J. (ORAL)
[ The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode ]
1. Mr. Firoz Ahmed - petitioner, who appears in person submits that
the order dated 02.06.2022 passed by this Court in W.P.(C). 1054/2019
directing, inter alia, the respondent No.1 therein to decide the
petitioner's appeal dated 26.11.2018 within a period of six weeks from
that date by following the due laid down procedure.
2. Mr. Ahmed - petitioner submits that order which was
subsequently passed on 14.07.2022 by the respondents, annexed as
Annexure-C2 at page No. 17 of the present petition, was not passed by
the Authority which was the competent Appellate Authority to the
petitioner's Disciplinary Authority, since the petitioner was a Scale-II
officer.
3. According to the petitioner, it is the Appellate Committee at
Mumbai, Maharashtra, which alone was the Competent Appellate
Authority to decide such appeal.
4. He submits that this information regarding the incompetency of
the person, who has passed the appellate order in appeal dated
14.07.2022, was obtained by him after a number of RTIs were filed, only
very recently, and as such, after getting such information, he has filed the
present petition.
5. In the meanwhile, petitioner also submits that he had approached
the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur against the impugned order dated
14.07.2022, however, upon receiving the aforesaid information, he
submits that he withdrew the said writ petition with liberty.
6. He submits that the order having been passed by the incompetent
Appellate Authority, is non est in law, and as such, being violative of the
order passed by this Court, contempt is made out.
7. Mr. Kapur, learned counsel appears for the respondent-Bank, and
on instructions of Mr. Bhagirath Patel, Manager (Law), SBI, AO-
Jodhpur, submits that the appeal dated 26.11.2018 will be placed
immediately before the Appellate Committee at Mumbai, Maharashtra,
which even according to the petitioner, who appears in person, is the
appropriate Appellate Authority.
8. In view of the above submissions, as also to do substantial justice,
this Court is of the considered opinion that to avoid unnecessary delay
and obviate further complications, the respondents would place the
petitioner's appeal dated 26.11.2018 before the Appellate Committee at
Mumbai within a period of one week from today.
9. The Appellate Committee is directed to dispose of the said appeal
within a period of four weeks in accordance with law and under the rules
and regulations of the State Bank of India.
10. With the aforesaid directions, the present contempt petition along
with pending applications is disposed of in accordance with law.
11. The aforesaid order has been passed without making any
observation on the merits of the matter.
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.
FEBRUARY 19, 2024/nd
