UCO BANK Vs. SUJIT BHATTACHARJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-employer assails a rather remarkable order by which the writ petitioner-employee has been found to be "notionally entitled to be promoted" to a post in the year 2006 on a petition instituted in 2011 after such employee had already retired.

(2.) Two principal grounds are canvassed by the appellant: that the writ petitioner had no right to seek any promotion or notional benefit pertaining to promotion after he had retired and the master-servant relationship between the parties had been severed, though the writ petitioner could continue to be entitled to the pensionary or retirement benefits; and, the writ court could not have assumed the jurisdiction of the interview board or the assessing authority and discovered that the writ petitioner was entitled to promotion in 2006, particularly without any documents or papers being available before the writ court.

(3.) The facts are not much in dispute. The writ petitioner was suspended in 2005 and disciplinary proceedings were commenced against him pursuant to a charge-sheet issued on January 5, 2006. However, by early 2007 the writ petitioner was acquitted of the charges and was reinstated in service without losing out on any account.