you're reading...
legal issues

service matter = Unless the suspension period is regularized treating the same as on duty by the disciplinary authority, the question of payment of difference of pay does not arise.


Kondavid-drug near Guntur

Image via Wikipedia

WRIT PETITION No.17159 OF 2011



Challa Srinivas Rao                                          ..  Petitioner


The Chairman and Managing Director,

Andhra Bank, Head or Central Office,

Saifabad, Hyderabad and others                      ..  Respondents























WRIT PETITION No.17159 OF 2011


This Writ Petition is filed to declare the proceedings in Lr.No.666/20/V/T-86/1399, dated 07.03.2011, of the respondent bank, insofar as denying the difference of salary and allowances of the petitioner for the period from 08.04.1996 to 30.06.2003, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to pay the difference of salary and allowances for the above said period to the petitioner.

2.       The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present writ petition may be stated as follows:

The petitioner made an application to the respondents for his appointment under dependants of deceased employees’ scheme.  The respondents, after due process, appointed him as
Clerk-cum-Cashier and directed him to join duty in Guntur Medical College Branch, Guntur on or before 04.09.1993.  Accordingly, the petitioner joined at Guntur Medical College Branch as Cashier and his service continued with effect from 28.02.1994.  While so, surprisingly, he received a letter from the Zonal Office on 08.04.1996 stating that he was suspended from service pending enquiry on the allegation of fraud alleged to have been committed by him.  In this regard, the CBI also initiated prosecution against the petitioner and ultimately by judgment, dated 21.05.2003 passed in C.C.No.1 of 1998 on the file of the Special Judge for CBI Cases, Visakhapatnam, he was convicted for the charges under Section 13(1)D read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 120B, 420, 467, 465 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed Crl.A.No.546 of 2003 and the same was allowed on 09.12.2009.  The petitioner submitted a representation on 12.07.2010 to the respondents seeking reinstatement with full back wages and all attendant benefits with effect from 08.04.1996, but the same was not considered by the respondents.  Therefore, the petitioner filed W.P.No.2858 of 2010 before this Court, which was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation dated 12.07.2010 and pass appropriate orders thereon.  The respondents vide letter dated 07.02.2011 directed the petitioner to report duty within 15 days at Zonal Office, Karimnagar, but refusing to give the benefits.  As the petitioner’s wife is working in Guntur, he requested the respondents to post him in and around Guntur, but in vain. Hence, the writ petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that though the petitioner was reinstated into service, he was not paid the difference of salary during the suspension period and the same may be paid to the petitioner.

There is no dispute that disciplinary proceedings are pending against the petitioner.  Unless the suspension period is regularized treating the same as on duty by the disciplinary authority, the question of payment of difference of pay does not arise.

Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed giving liberty to the petitioner to make a representation before the respondent authorities seeking redressal of his grievance.  There shall be no order as to costs.





About advocatemmmohan



Comments are closed.

Blog Stats

  • 2,891,707 hits



Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,906 other followers
Follow advocatemmmohan on WordPress.com
%d bloggers like this: