Madras High Court
K. Krushnasamy vs The Executive ... on 27 March, 2023
W.A.No. 760 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.03.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PERIYASAMY VADAMALAI
W.A.No. 760 of 2010
K. Krushnasamy ... Appellant
Vs.
1. The Executive Director-cum-Appellate Authority,
Canara Bank,
Head Office, 112 JC Road,
Bangalore- 2.
2. The General Manager-cum-Disciplinary Authority,
Canara Bank,
Industrial Relation Section,
Personal Wing, Head Office,
122, J.C. Road, Bangalore -2.
3. The Deputy General Manager (AG),
Canara Bank, Disciplinary Action Cell,
Circle Officer, Chennai. ...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against
the order passed in W.P.No. 6901 of 2006 dated 27.01.2010.
For Appellant : Mr. V. Ramamurthy
For Respondents : Mr. C. Seethapathy
for Mr. P.R. Raman
for R1 to R3
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No. 760 of 2010
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.]
The appellant has filed the instant appeal challenging the order
passed in the writ petition in W.P.No. 6901 of 2006 dated 27.01.2010.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that, even though
the appellant has filed the writ petition, challenging the order of punishment
of compulsory retirement, imposed by the respondent bank and the same
was dismissed by this Court and aggrieved by the same, he had preferred
an appeal, challenging the order passed by the writ court and the same is
pending, now he seeks for provident fund and gratuity amount from the
respondent bank, which the appellant is entitled for as per the provisions of
the Act and same has not been settled to him. Therefore, at this stage,
appropriate orders may be passed, since the appellant is entitled for the
provident fund and gratuity amount from the respondent bank.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No. 760 of 2010
3. The Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent bank
fairly submitted that though the appellant has challenged the order of
compulsory retirement by filing the writ petition and the writ court has
elaborately considered the same on merits and dismissed the writ petition,
the appellant is entitled for the relief now sought for by him for provident
fund and gratuity amount as per the provisions of Act and if the appellant
approaches the bank, the same will be considered, if not already settled.
4. Considering the said submissions of the parties concerned, we are
of the view that the appellant shall submit an appropriate application before
the respondent bank in an appropriate format, within a period of two weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such application
being submitted within the said time to the respondent bank, the
respondent bank is directed to consider the same and extend the aforesaid
benefit of provident fund and gratuity amount to the appellant within a
period of eight weeks thereafter.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No. 760 of 2010
5. With the above directions, the writ appeal stands disposed of. No
costs.
(D.K.K., J.) (P.V.M., J.)
27.03.2023
Intex : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
mrn
To
1. The Executive Director-cum-Appellate Authority,
Canara Bank,
Head Office, 112 JC Road,
Bangalore- 2.
2. The General Manager-cum-Disciplinary Authority,
Canara Bank,
Industrial Relation Section,
Personal Wing, Head Office,
122, J.C. Road, Bangalore -2.
3. The Deputy General Manager (AG),
Canara Bank, Disciplinary Action Cell,
Circle Officer, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No. 760 of 2010
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
and
PERIYASAMY VADAMALAI, J.
(mrn)
W.A.No. 760 of 2010
27.03.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
