KUNNATH CHANDRASEKHARAN Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, an octogenarian soldier, who had volunteered to serve the country during the first Indo-Pak war, leaving the comforts of his office at the State Bank of India, clamour for recognition of the service rendered by him to the motherland. Are we to turn the appellant away on the ground of delay in voicing his grievance or should he be afforded a hearing is the question we are faced with in this appeal.

(2.) The appellant had filed the writ petition seeking the following reliefs:

(3.) A brief narration of facts, as stated in the writ petition, are as follows: The appellant had joined the State Bank of India as a Probationary Assistant in the year 1957. He was subsequently promoted and was working as Accountant-I when the first national emergency was declared in the wake of the war between India and Pakistan. The Government called for volunteers from among able bodied men, both employed and otherwise. As far as persons in the employment of the Central Government and its institutions were concerned, it was assured that the period spent by the persons who volunteered for service in the Armed Forces would be treated as service in their parent organization for the purpose of their seniority and other benefits. Motivated by patriotism, the appellant volunteered for military service. On being selected, the appellant, underwent military training and was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the I- Armed Brigade and posted at the Sialkot Sector in 1964, at the war front. The appellant continued his military service up to 1967 and thereafter rejoined as an Accountant at the Madurai Branch of the SBI. According to the appellant, contrary to the assurances and promises, his military service was not reckoned as service with the SBI, which resulted in his juniors being promoted during his absence. In 1971, the appellant was posted as a Faculty Member at the State Bank of India Staff College at Hyderabad where he continued till 1974. In 1974, he was sent on deputation to Tanzania as Senior Lecturer at the Institute of Finance Management, where he continued till 1980. On completion of five years service outside India, the appellant was directed to report back. But, being disillusioned and disheartened by the treatment meted out to him by the employer, the appellant resigned from service in 1980. Even though the appellant requested for disbursal of retirement benefits, including pension, that was not heeded to, in spite of repeated representations. The appellant therefore approached this Court by filing W.P(C).No.7310 of 2012, which resulted in Exhibit P2 judgment. Under Ext.P2, this Court directed the General Manager and Head, Grievance Redressal Machinery, SBI to consider the appellant's representation and pass appropriate orders thereon within three months. The appellant alleges that no proper decision was taken and communicated to him in compliance of Exhibit P2. Therefore, he issued Exhibit P3 legal notice demanding damages to the tune of Rs.1 Crore for the hardships and sufferings he had to undergo, as a result of the discriminatory action of the employer. The Bank issued Exhibit P4 reply discarding the claim of the appellant as untenable and stating that the appellant's grievance had already been considered and rejected pursuant to the direction in Exhibit P2 judgment. Yet again, the appellant caused a legal notice to be issued, to which the Bank replied under Exhibit P6, reiterating its earlier stand.