K LAKSHMI Vs. SARASWATHI GRAMEENA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri G. Rama Gopal, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri K. Gopala Krishna Murthy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the third respondent.

(2.) The petitioner, who had been working with the respondents 1 and 2 herein, as a Manager, filed this writ petition, inter alia, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus challenging the validity of Rule 10 (2) of Sri Saraswathi Grammena Bank (Staff) Service Regulations, 1983 (for short, 'the Regulation, 1983'), as unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and also to declare the impugned order dated 1-9-1998 as bad, illegal and arbitrary and opposed to the principles of natural justice and consequently for a direction to reinstate her with full back wages and continuity of service with all other attendant benefits.

(3.) Though initially, a challenge was sought to be made against the validity of the aforesaid Regulation 10 (2) of the Regulations, 1983, however, having regard to the decision of the Apex Court in M.K. Agarwal v. Gurgaon Gramin Bank and others whereunder similar such provision of a Regional Rural Bank was held to be arbitrary and unconstitutional, the counsel on either side did not make any submissions on that aspect.