P. J. Paul v. State Bank of India and Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** ## **WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 30TH POUSHA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.18313 OF 2011(L)** ## **PETITIONER:** **P.J.PAUL, DEPUTY MANAGER – ACCOUNTS OFFICIATING),STATE BANK OF INDIA, KAIPUZHA BRANCH,, KOTTAYAM-686602** **BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.) SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN SRI.T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER,LOCAL HEAD OFFICE,, THAMPANOOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2 THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (ADMINISTRATION),STATE BANK OF INDIA,LOCAL HEAD, OFFICE,THAMPANOOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3 THE CHIEF MANAGER (ADMINISTRATION) STATE BANK OF INDIA,REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE,, THIRUNAKKARA,KOTTAYAM-686001. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH R1-3 BY SRI.P.GOPAL, SC, SBI** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WPC 18313/11 2 ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner says that when this Writ Petition was filed in the year 2011, he was a Graduate Special Assistant working under the 1[st] respondent-Bank and that he was given an in-cadre promotion as Cash Officer, with effect from 01.10.2005. He says that on such promotion being granted to him, as is evident from Ext.P2, he took charge from the Deputy Manager (Cash) and that he was officiating in such post as a Deputy Manager (Accounts), which is clear from Exts.P2 and P4. 2. The petitioner says that because of his in-cadre promotion through Ext.P2, he was denied promotion as a Special Senior Assistant with an allowance of Rs.3,500/- and was given regular promotion in Junior Management Grade (JMG) scale I with effect from 12.08.2009, and was granted officiating allowance after 12.08.2009 but denied the scale of pay in the WPC 18313/11 3 JMG or even officiating allowance from 01.10.2005. 3. The petitioner says that he, therefore, made his claim for the afore benefits through Ext.P7, but that it has been rejected through Ext.P8 without assigning any reason, except saying that his request cannot be considered. He, therefore, prays that Ext.P8 be set aside and he be declared to be entitled to the scale of pay of Junior Manager Grade Scale I; or at least Senior Special Assistant with an allowance of Rs.3,500/-, from 01.10.2005, with consequential pay fixation pursuant to Exts.P5 and P6. 4. In response to the afore submissions made on behalf of the petitioner by his – learned counsel Sri.Sachin Ramesh, the learned Standing Counsel for the Bank – Sri.P.Gopal, conceded that Ext.P8 is a nonspeaking order but explained that the reasons, WPC 18313/11 4 why the petitioner could not be granted benefits claimed for by him, has been averred in the counter affidavit sworn to by the 2nd respondent. He submitted that since the petitioner was promoted as an Assistant Manager in the cadre of Junior Manager Grade I, with effect from 12.08.2009 and was posted as Deputy Manager Accounts - officiating as per Ext.P4, he was granted officiating allowance as Deputy Manager (Accounts) for the relevant period and that he is not eligible or entitled for officiating allowance for the period between Exts.P2 and P4. He added that the petitioner is also not entitled to special allowance attached to Senior Special Assistants at the rate of Rs.3,500/- per month and therefore, that there is no question of any violation of the constitutional guarantees of the petitioner. He, therefore, prayed that this Writ Petition be dismissed. WPC 18313/11 5 5. However, in reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner – Sri.Sachin Ramesh submitted that; as is evident from Ext.P2, his client was only granted in-cadre promotion under career progression special pay and therefore, that the averments in the counter affidavit are not sufficient to deny him the benefits as sought for by him in Ext.P7. He, therefore, reiteratingly prayed that Ext.P8 be set aside and the reliefs sought for in this Writ Petition be granted. 6. I have considered the afore submissions and have also examined the materials available on record. 7. At the outset, I must say that Ext.P8 is a wholly non-speaking order which has rejected the claim of the petitioner through Ext.P7, in the following manner: With respect to the above, the appropriate authority has advised that, the request of the official cannot be considered. WPC 18313/11 6 The official may be advised accordingly. Therefore, there is substantial justification for the petitioner in having approached this Court, particularly because the reasons why his claim in Ext.P7 has been rejected cannot be discerned from Ext.P8 order at all. 8. That said, Sri.P.Gopal tried to support Ext.P8 on the strength of the averments in the counter affidavit but I am afraid that this cannot find favour with this Court since it is well-settled, through the various judgments starting from **Mohinder Singh** **Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner [1978(1)** **SCC 405],** that an impugned order cannot be bettered or explained by pleadings or by subsequent orders. The competent Authority ought to have considered the petitioner's claim made in Ext.P7 and ought to have answered to it properly, rather than have WPC 18313/11 7 issued Ext.P8 merely saying that his request cannot be considered. 9. Therefore, notwithstanding the averments in the counter affidavit, I am certain that the competent Authority of the respondent-Bank must reconsider the petitioner's claim as impelled in Ext.P7 at the earliest and unfettered what is contended by them in the pleadings before this Court. In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition and set aside Ext.P8; with a consequential direction to the competent Authority of the respondent-Bank to reconsider Ext.P7 representation of the petitioner and take a fresh decision thereon, after affording him an opportunity of being heard – either physically or through videoconferencing – thus culminating in an appropriate order thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than four months from the date of receipt of a WPC 18313/11 8 copy of this judgment. |After<br>I<br>dictated<br>this<br>judgment,| |---| |Sri.P.Gopal submitted that the relevant Rules| |applicable to the petitioner have been| |produced along with the counter affidavit as| |Exts.R2(a) and R2(b) and therefore, that the| |afore directions may not be taken to construe| |that these Rules cannot be looked into by the| |competent Authority,<br>while the exercise as| |ordered herein is completed.| |Needless to say<br>, what I meant afore was| |that the averments in the counter affidavit| |will not constrain reconsideration of the| |petitioner's claim in Ext.P7, but not that the| |relevant Rules cannot be looked into or| |applied.| **Sd/-** ## **DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **RR JUDGE** WPC 18313/11 9 ## APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE SERVICE RULES. - EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 01/10/2005. - EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SIGN ON DETAILS OF THE PETITIONER PUBLISHED BY THE BANK. - EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16/10/2009 ISSUED BY THE SBI KATTOOR BRANCH. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 14/11/2009. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 16/02/2010. - EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 07/10/10 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20/11/2010 ISSUED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER, SBI, KAIPUZHA BRANCH. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DATED 08/02/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 11/03/2011 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, SBI TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 25/03/2011 BEFORE THE CENTRAL PUBLIC WPC 18313/11 10 INFORMATION OFFICER, SBI, THIRUNAKKARA BRANCH. - EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 14/05/2011 ALONG WITH CIRCULARS DATED 06/05/2008, 20/05/2008 AND 27/05/2009. - EXHIBIT P13 COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE CORE BANKING BRANCH MANUAL. - EXHIBIT P14 COPY OF THE PAY SLIP OF THE PETITIONER FOR SEPTEMBER, 2011. - EXHIBIT P15 COPY OF THE PAY SLIP OF THE PETITIONER FOR OCTOBER, 2011. - EXHIBIT P16 COPY OF THE PAY SLIPS OF THE SENIOR SPECIAL ASSISTANT, SMT. LILLY GEORGE FOR SEPTEMBER, 2011 AND OCTOBER, 2011. - RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT R2(A) A TRUE COPY OF 'E' CIRCULAR NO. CDO/P & HRD-IR/182005-2006 DATED 07/07/2005 EVIDENCING THE SCHEME OF INCADRE PROMOTIONS TO SENIOR ASSISTANTS AND SPECIAL ASSISTANTS IN THE CLERICAL CADRE AND THE DUTIES ATTACHED TO SUCH IN CADRE PROMOTION POST. EXHIBIT R2(B) A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. CDO/P&HRD IR/47/2009-10 DATED 20/10/2009.