PREM CHAND JAIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner a Development Officer of the Respondent Bank by this writ petition seeks quashing of order dated 9.9.2004. By the impugned order petitioner was directed to hand over charge and not to attend the Bank w.e.f. 18.9.2004 as his contract had not been extended by the Board of Directors of respondent Bank. Petitioner also seeks direction for payment of his emoluments for the month of July and August,2004.

(2.) Petitioner had retired from the Central Bank of India as a Manager. Post-retirement he was appointed by the respondent, Jain Cooperative Bank as a Development Officer to promote the business of the Bank. Petitioner's case is that his contract is wrongfully sought to be terminated by the order of 9.9.2004, while the contract stood extended upto 31.12.2004 as communicated by the Secretary of the respondent Bank. The stand of the respondent bank appears to be that contract has not been extended after its expiry on 30.6.2004.

(3.) The question arising for consideration is whether the alleged wrongful termination of the contractual service by the Bank could be the subject matter of a writ petition.