Skip to content


P.K.(Pavitra Kumar) Banerjee Vs. M.P.State Co-operative Bank Ltd. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Decided On

Appellant

P.K.(Pavitra Kumar) Banerjee

Respondent

M.P.State Co-operative Bank Ltd.

Excerpt:


.....for the petitioner. shri h. singh, learned counsel for the respondents. i.a.no.860/2012 has been filed by the petitioner for taking relevant facts on record and it is pointed out that even though in pursuance to the order passed by this court on 4.4.2012 petitioner is reinstated and permitted to join duties after order annexure r1/4 was passed on 18.4.2012 but regular salary in accordance to entitlement and pay scale prescribed is not made, instead a sum of rs.11,000/- towards advance is being paid to the petitioner. grievance of the petitioner is that once in pursuance to the order passed on 4.4.2012 he has been reinstated and discharging his duties, he is entitled to relevant pay scale on which he is working and respondents with a view to harass the petitioner are not granting the said benefits. learned counsel for the respondents prays for a week's time to seek instructions and give his say in the matter. respondents are directed to file an affidavit indicating as to how and in what manner the order passed by this court on 4.4. 2012 is being complied with and indicating the manner in which payment of salary is made to the petitioner. let an affidavit be filed on or.....

Judgment:


W.P.No.4252/2010 4.7.2012 Smt.

Shobha Menon, learned Senior Counsel with Ms.Surabhi Ahirkar, for the petitioner.

Shri H.

Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.

I.A.No.860/2012 has been filed by the petitioner for taking relevant facts on record and it is pointed out that even though in pursuance to the order passed by this Court on 4.4.2012 petitioner is reinstated and permitted to join duties after order Annexure R1/4 was passed on 18.4.2012 but regular salary in accordance to entitlement and pay scale prescribed is not made, instead a sum of Rs.11,000/- towards advance is being paid to the petitioner.

Grievance of the petitioner is that once in pursuance to the order passed on 4.4.2012 he has been reinstated and discharging his duties, he is entitled to relevant pay scale on which he is working and respondents with a view to harass the petitioner are not granting the said benefits.

Learned counsel for the respondents prays for a week's time to seek instructions and give his say in the matter.

Respondents are directed to file an affidavit indicating as to how and in what manner the order passed by this Court on 4.4.

2012 is being complied with and indicating the manner in which payment of salary is made to the petitioner.

Let an affidavit be filed on or before 9 th of July, 2012.

List on 10.7.2012.

c.c.today.

(RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE MRS.mishra


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //