Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

(Bikash Chandra Sinha vs Contai Co-Operative Bank on 17 September, 2019

                                                 1


08   17.09.2019                    C.A.N. 886 of 2019
pg                                         in
                                   M.A.T. 47 of 2019
                   (Bikash Chandra Sinha vs. Contai Co-operative Bank
                                     Limited & Ors.)

                  Mr. Soumya Majumder
                  Mr. Victor Chatterjee........for the appellant-applicant

                  Mr. Tapan Kr. Mukherjee
                  Mr. Somnath Naskar...............for the State

                  Mr. Joydip Kar
                  Mr. Bilwadal Bhattacharya
                  Mr. Sayak Chakrabarti...........for the Cooperative Bank


                              Affidavit has been filed by the appellant-

                  applicant in compliance with the earlier order dated

                  September 11, 2019. We have perused the said affidavit,

                  which reveals that the appellant-applicant had the

                  occasion to meet the investigating officer on February 10,

                  2018 when, however, his attendance was not recorded.

                              Mr. Tapan Kr. Mukherjee, learned Additional

                  Government Pleader, upon obtaining instructions from

                  the officer investigating Nandigram Police Station F.I.R.

                  No. 294 of 2013 dated September 18, 2013 under sections

                  406/409/420/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code

                  submits that the appellant-applicant was earlier called to

                  facilitate free, fair and proper investigation as a witness

                  but now that there are ample materials collected against

                  him and there is a possibility of the appellant-applicant

                  being shown as an accused, his interrogation was

                  necessary but he did not respond resulting in the charge-

                  sheet not having been filed.

                              Insofar as the investigation is concerned, we

                  leave it to the discretion of the investigating officer and

                  observe that the law will take its own course.

                              Regarding release of retiral benefits in favour
                               2


of the appellant-applicant, we have been informed by Mr.

Kar, learned senior advocate appearing for the cooperative

bank that in excess of Rs. 7,00,000/- on account of

provident fund has been released in favour of the

appellant-applicant and that Rs. 9,51,366/- towards

employer's share of provident fund, Rs. 7,98,428/- on

account of Gratuity and Rs. 3,45,986/- on account of

leave encashment are yet to be released.

               Having regard to the nature of the order

under challenge before us, we are of the opinion that the

appeal is required to be heard.

               As and by way of an interim measure, we

direct the cooperative bank to release the gratuity amount

to which the appellant-applicant is entitled. For such

purpose, the appellant-applicant may meet the Secretary

of the cooperative bank on September 24, 2019 at 12.00

noon when a cheque for the said amount shall be handed

over to him.

               A statement of the provident fund dues shall

also be furnished to the appellant-applicant by the

cooperative bank.

               However, such payment and acceptance by

the parties shall be without prejudice to their rights and

contentions in the appeal.

               In view of the above order, the application for

stay (C.A.N. 886 of 2019) stands disposed of. There shall

be no order as to costs.

               Since all the respondents are before us,

service of notice of appeal on them is dispensed with.

The appeal shall be treated as ready 3 regarding service.

Let adequate number of informal paper books-printed, typewritten or cyclostyled containing all the papers that were available before the writ Court be filed by the appellant-applicant within four weeks after vacation with copy to the respondents.

Once the paper books are served on the respondents, the parties shall have the liberty to mention the appeal for hearing before the appropriate bench. (SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.) (DIPANKAR DATTA, J.)