R L KHASHU Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners 12 in number, have filed the present writ petition seeking quashing of the decision of respondent No. 3 posting petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 to Udhampur branch of respondent No. 3 vide Annexure P-7 dated 9th October, 2003 by which the petitioner No. 1 was deployed as Branch Manager at the Udhampur Branch permanently. Similar order dated 6th September, 2003 was passed in respect of petitioner No. 2 who was posted as Field Officer at the Udhampur Branch and asked to report for duty immediately. The remaining petitioners also assail similar contemplating action against them. Petitioners seek a direction for status quo till normalcy is restored in the State of Jammu and Kashmir or in the alternative seek direction for posting to State Bank of India being sponsor bank.

(2.) Notice to show cause in the case had been issued. Pleadings have been completed. Even though there are no interim orders passed, respondents have not taken any precipitative action. During the course of hearing, records from State Bank of India, Central Office, Mumbai as well as correspondence exchanged with Union of India and respondent No. 3-Ellaquai Dehati Bank (in short "EDB") were produced. During the course of proceedings, petitioners' Counsel had also produced a letter addressed by Deputy Chief Minister, Jammu & Kashmir to the President of Nodal Agency for Displaced Kashmiris stating that Resident Commissioner of Jammu and Kashmir had been advised not to relieve the Kashmiris migrant employees. Notice was also issued to the Resident Commissioner, State of Jammu & Kashmir to ascertain whether the employees of respondent Nos. 2 & 3 would also be covered within the ambit of letter dated 2nd February, 2004 of Deputy Chief Minister of State of Jammu and Kashmir to which we shall advert in later part. Arguments were heard and judgment reserved.

(3.) Mr. Rakesh Tikku, learned Counsel for the petitioners on behalf of petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 submitted that said petitioners were forced to abandon their residence during the height of militancy in 1988-89. Following the militancy, there was large scale exodus. Central Government, State Bank of India and EDB treated the migration of employees as a human problem. Instructions were issued by the Central Government, Ministry of Finance to the State Bank of India as well as by State Bank of India to EDB to release the salary of the employees. Efforts were also made to post these employees to Regional Rural Banks (in short RRBs) and other branches of State Bank of India where ever they could be adjusted. Some of the employees got the postings and reported to duty and others could not be posted and continued to receive the salary.