(1.) THE appellant-Bank aggrieved by the judgment dated 317/2007 and the order dated 5/5/2009 has preferred this appeal contending that the learned Judge has fallen in error in allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent-writ petitioners extending them consequential benefits of absorption in the appellant-Bank w.e.f. 9/3/1992.
(2.) SRI P.S. Baghel, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant- Bank contends that the respondent-writ petitioners were not entitled to any such benefits, but on instructions at the time of the hearing of this appeal, he submits that in the event this Court arrives at a conclusion that the respondent-writ petitioners were entitled to any notional benefit then the same could be granted only to the extent of the payment of gratuity.
(3.) THE Registrar, Cooperative Societies issued an order on 9.3.1992 in accordance with which the respondent-writ petitioners claimed that they were entitled for absorption. A writ petition was filed being Writ Petition No. 3324 of 1992 in which an order was passed on 15.9.1992 calling upon the Bank to consider such claims and pass appropriate orders.