KAILASH CHANDER VERMA Vs. P.N.B.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this writ petition is to communication dated 12th December, 2003, vide which petitioner has been intimated by the Zonal Manager, Punjab National Bank Zonal Office, Shimla that he is not entitled to full salary but to subsistence allowance which has been and is being paid in terms of Officer Employees (D&A) Regulation, 1977 (hereafter referred to as "1977 Regulation"). This intimation was given to the petitioner in response to his representation that he be paid full salary for the period 10.2.1998 to 15.6.2000 and the subsistence allowance be refixed after releasing the increments fallen due during this period.

(2.) Petitioner is further seeking writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay full salary to him from 10.2.1998 i.e. the date when he was placed under suspension upto the date of his removal from service.

(3.) In brief, the facts are that in contemplation of departmental inquiry, the petitioner was placed under suspension on 10.2.1998. The charge sheet was served upon him on 20th July, 1998 and on conclusion of the inquiry, order dated 16.6.2000 was passed by the Disciplinary Authority, imposing major penalty of removal from service which was not to be treated as disqualification for future service. The petitioner challenged the order of removal from service in appeal and revision before the statutory authorities, but the same were dismissed. Petitioner yet not satisfied, filed CWP No. 328 of 2002 for quashing the order of penalty of removal from service. On 2.9.2003, this Court quashed the order of penalty imposed by the respondents, but held that the respondents will be free to deal with the matter after looking to the reply submitted by the petitioner. The petitioner was relegated to the position as it existed prior to the passing of order dated 16.6.2000. The relevant portion of the judgment dated 2.9.2003 reads as under: - "without going into the merits of other contentions raised on behalf of the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of purely on what has been stated hereinabove and is not to be - taken as an expression of opinion on merits of the case as set upon in their pleadings by the parties. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed and as a result of it, the impugned orders as contained in Annexures P -9, P -11 and P -13 are hereby quashed and set aside. What follows from this is that position as it existed prior to passing of Annexure P -9 is restored. It is also clarified, that if the respondents decide to go ahead with the charges as contained in Annexure P -2, they will be free to deal with the matter after looking to the reply submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure P -5. Then after taking stock of the whole situation, the Disciplinary Authority may take such action as it thinks fit under law. in such a situation this order will not come in its way."