T. PADMAJA Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking the relief of Mandamus declaring the letter dated 15.10.2018 issued to the petitioner by the 3rd respondent as arbitrary, illegal and to direct the 3rd respondent to return the gold ornaments in respect of four gold loans which are supposedly secured.

(2.) This Court has heard Sri N.Krishna Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Government Pleader for Cooperation appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 5. Sri Srinivas Polavarapu, appearing for Respondent Nos.2 to 4.

(3.) The petitioner before this Court worked as a Manager in the SPSR Nellore District Cooperative Central Bank. The 2nd respondent is the CEO of the Bank, the third respondent is the Manager of the Bank. Because of certain allegations of financial irregularities etc., an enquiry was commenced against her under the applicable statutory provisions and she was dismissed from service. The same is being separately challenged as per the learned counsel. Apart from that, the learned counsel submits that the petitioner has availed four gold loans. All these four gold loans were advanced against security of certain gold ornaments. The four (4) gold loans that are availed by the writ petitioner were totally cleared and there is no debt outstanding. Therefore, the petitioner sought the return of the gold ornaments. At that stage, a charge memo dated 27.06.2018 is issued and an enquiry was conducted. This enquiry resulted in dismissal in service, which is mentioned earlier. Apart from that the petitioner submits that in June, 2018 as the loan was cleared, the respondent-Bank should have returned the ornaments. He points out that on 12.07.2018 a letter was addressed by the petitioner for return of the ornaments which was refused by the impugned letter dated 15.12.2018 only on the ground that an enquiry is being conducted.