Calcutta High Court
The Chairman And Managing Director, ... vs Dilip Kumar De on 29 April, 1987
Equivalent citations: (1987)0CALLT702(HC), 91CWN1150, (1988)ILLJ32CAL
Author: G.N. Ray
Bench: G.N. Ray
JUDGMENT G.N. Ray, J.
1. This appeal is directed against order, dated 12th November, 1984 passed in Civil Rule No. 15273(W) of 1984. The respondent Sri Dilip Kumar De moved a writ application inter alia challenging the continuation of the order of suspension passed against him by the Punjab National Bank and also prayed for consequential reliefs on revocation of the order of suspension. On the said writ application, the aforesaid Civil Rule No. 15273(W) of 1984 was issued by this Court. It may be noted that the respondent writ petitioner Sri De impleaded Union of India through the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs, Banking Division along with other respondents, viz., respondent Nos. 1 to 4 in the writ petition. The aforesaid Rule succeeded before this Court by the impugned judgment passed by the learned Trial Judge on 12th November, 1984, but in the instant appeal preferred by the Chairman and Managing Director, Punjab National Bank and thre of its Officers the respondent No. 1 in the writ petition, the Union of India has not been impleaded. It appears that during the pendency of the writ proceeding, the learned Trial Judge passed an order on 20th September, 1984 inter alia directing the respondents of the writ petition to consider the case of the writ petitioner respondent Sri Dilip Kumar De in the light of the facts and circumstances referred to in the order of the learned Trial Judge. Pursuant to such direction of the learned Trial Judge, the Deputy General Manager (P), Punjab National Bank, had passed an order inter alia holding that the order of suspension passed against Sri De should not remain stayed and/or revoked because such order of revocation of the order of suspencion and consequential posting of Sri De would not be in the interest of the Bank.
2. It appears from the order passed by the Deputy General Manager (P), Punjab National Bank that the said Deputy General Manager was of the view that delay in disposing of the criminal proceedings against Sri De by the concerned Courts was not on account of any fault on the part of the Bank. It may be noted in this connection that the writ petitioner respondent, Sri De entered the service of Punjab National Bank in 1963 in a Branch Office in Calcutta and after completion of the probation period, he was appointed as a probationary clerk-cum-godown keeper sometime in December, 1963 and after six months, he was made permanent in the Bank's service. Thereafter, the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act 1970 was passed and several Banks including Punjab National Bank were nationalised and since then the said Bank has been functioning as a nationalised Bank. The writ petitioner respondent Sri De contended in the writ petition that in consideration of the meritorious service rendered by him, he was promoted to the rank of Accountant in December, 1973 and was posted in the Branch Office of the said Bank at Jodhpur in the State of Rajasthan and thereafter, he was transferred to the Branch Office, Exhibition Road, Patna in November, 1974 and thereafter was again transferred to the Regional Office at Patna in April, 1975. While Sri De had been acting as an Accountant in the Regional Office at Patna, he was selected for the post of next higher rank, i.e., Assistant Manager/Officer-in-charge and he was awaiting such posting order.
3. Unfortunately, at this time, by a letter, dated July 28, 1975 the Regional Manager, Punjab National Bank, Patna being respondent No. 5 in the writ petition and the appellant No. 4 in the instant appeal placed Sri De under suspension on and allegation of the complicity of Sri De in some fraudulent transactions in the Bank's Branch at Jodhpur. The petitioner was arrested in connection with a F. I. R. lodged relating to the incident at Jodhpur Branch of the Bank and a criminal case was started against Sri De before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur. It appears that on the basis of another F. I. R. lodged sometime in September, 1975 by the Bank Authorities at Patna, another criminal case was started in the Criminal Court at Patna. The relevant facts concerning the said two criminal proceedings instituted at Jodhpur and Patna may be stated as hereunder :
(I) The Case instituted before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur :--
(a) F. I. R. lodged on or about July 12, 1975 Second F.I.R on or about August 2, 1975.
(b) Charge-sheet was submitted by the police on 29th December, 1975 and further charge-sheet containing full set of charge was submitted in July, 1978.
(c) Charges have been framed under Sections 409 and 420 I. P.C. on 17th July, 1980 by the learned Magistrate. (II) Cases pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Patna :--
(a) F.I.R. lodged in September, 1975.
(b) Charge-sheet submitted by the police in 1980.
(c) Charges framed in 1981 under Sections 409, 420, 467 and 468 I. P. C.
4. Mr. De has contended in the writ petition that he was implicated in the criminal cases out of sheer malice. He has also contended that no transaction could be completed by a single man in a Banking transaction and at least 3 or 4 persons have to play their respective roles in completing a transaction of the Bank. Mr. De has also contended that as an Accountant he had to pass bills and/or cheques endorsed by other employees of the Bank in course of his official duties and such Officers and Employees had the (primary duty of making necessary checks before placing the matter for signature by the Accountant. It has been contended by the writ petitioner Sri De that any person having a basic knowledge in the banking rules, regulations and procedures cannot reasonably think that on the allegations made in the F. I. R. Sri De, being an Accountant, could have been implicated in a charge of cheating and/or fraud. It has been contended by Sri De that if at all a case of criminal conspiracy to defraud the Bank is to be established, several employees of the Bank who had taken part in completing the transaction in question must have been implicated in the criminal proceeding along with Sri De but the criminal proceeding against a solitary Officer of the Bank, viz., Sri De is bound to fail on the ultimate analysis. Sri De has contended that on and from 1st October, 1977 the Board of Directors of the Punjab National Bank framed a regulation known as. 'Punjab National Bank Officer Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations 1977' under the Authority given under Section 19 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970. By the said Discipline and Appeal Regulations, the procedure of discipline and appeal of the Officers of the said Bank including the procedure for suspension and subsistence allowance has been indicated. Regulation 12 of the said Discipline and Appeal Regulations provides for that an Officer-employee may be placed under suspension by the Competent Authority--
(a) Where a disciplinary proceeding against him is contemplated or is pending ; or
(b) Where a case against him in respect of any criminal offence is under investigation, inquiry or trial.
5. It has also been provided for that an Officer-employee shall be deemed to have been placed under suspension with effect from the date of suspension if he is detained in custody, whether on a criminal charge or otherwise, for a period exceeding 48 hours. Regulation 14 provides for subsistence allowance during suspension and it has been provided for that an Officer-employee who is placed under suspension shall during the period of suspension and subject to Sub-regulations (2) to (4) would be entitled to receive payment from the Bank by way of subsistence allowance on the following scale :--
(a) Basic pay--For the first three months of suspension one-third of the basic pay which the Officer-employee was receiving on the date prior to the date of suspension.
(b) For the subsequent period after three months from the date of suspension.
(i) where the enquiry is held departmentally by the bank half of the basic pay he v/as drawing, and
(ii) where the enquiry is held by an outside-agency one-third of the basic pay for the next three months and half of the basic pay for the remaining period of suspension.
For the entire period of suspension, dearness allowance and other allowances excepting conveyance allowance, entertainment allowance and special allowance would be calculated on the reduced pay as specified in (i) and (ii) of Clause (a) of Regulation 12.
During the period of suspension, an Officer-employee shall not be entitled to occupy a rent free house or free use of the Bank's car or receipt of conveyance or entertainment allowance or special allowance.
6. Mr. De has contended that in order to mitigate the sufferings caused on account of prolonged suspension, the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs/Cabinet Secretariat issued various guidelines to the administrative authorities providing procedures for periodical review of each case of suspension by the authorities higher than the Disciplinary Authorities. Copies of such instructions of the Government of India have been annexed to the writ petition. As the Punjab National Bank is a nationalised Bank and as such an agency of the Central Government, similar instructions in the form of a memorandum being numbered 1/33/81, vig., dated 29th June, 1981 was also issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs (Banking Division) New Delhi inter alia directing all the nationalised banks to follow similar guidelines issued by the Ministry of Home affairs/ Cabinet Secretariat for periodical review of similar cases at their end so that there cannot be any deviation from the policy decision taken by the Central Government in such or similar matters. A copy of the said memorandum has also been annexed to the writ petition. Mr. De has contended that initially he did not receive even the suspension allowance but ultimately suspension allowance was paid to him from the later part of 1978 through the Bank's Branch at Park Street, Calcutta. Such payment from the Branch Office at Calcutta is being paid on the basis of the representation made by Sri De to the Manager, D. A. C., Punjab National Bank, Personnel Division, Head Office at New Delhi. Mr. De has contended that with the meagre suspension allowance at the rate of half of the basic pay drawn by him in 1975, it has become almost impossible for the petitioner to maintain himself and the members of his family and to defend two criminal cases, one at Patna and the other at Jodhpur in Rajasthan. With the abnormal price hike of essential commodities in recent times, the misery of the appellant has aggravated beyond description. In the above perspective, Sri De made a representation from Calcutta on 16th June, 1981 to the Chairman and Managing Director, Punjab National Bank, Head Office, New Delhi for revoking the order of suspension. Such representation was made on 16th June, 1981 but the same was not found acceptable by the said Authority. It appears that during the continuance of the suspension, Sri De appeared at Zonal Office at Patna for interview for selection to the post of MMC Scale II on 23rd April, 1983 but no effect was given to the said interview because of the continuance of the alleged order of suspension and pendency of the criminal cases and the result of such interview has allegedly been kept in a sealed cover thereby blocking the avenues of promotion of Sri De until the criminal cases are concluded. Sri De has contended that the delay in completing the criminal case instituted in 1975 was not on account of fault on the part of Sri De but the Bank Authorities and the Police Authorities are not proceeding diligently to conclude the said criminal trials which, according to Sri De, are bound to fail in the facts and circumstances of the case. Sri De has contended that he has been subjected to untold miseries, humiliation both mentally and physically and acute financial distress due to prolonged order of suspension for about 12 years and it is almost impossible for the petitioner to withstand such physical and mental torture any further. He has contended that the aforesaid order of suspension having continued for about 12 years has resulted into a punitive action by efflux of time. Sri De has contended in the writ petition that although he made representation to the Chairman and Managing Director, Punjab National Bank to review of the question of continuance of the order of suspension, the same had not been considered by the Chairman-cum-Managing Director and on the prayer of the writ petitioner, Sri De, the learned Trial Judge passed an order on 20th September, 1984 directing the respondents to consider the case of revocation of the order of suspension in the facts and circumstances indicated by the learned Trial Judge and it was only at this stage that the Deputy General Manager (P), Punjab National Bank took into consideration the case of Sri De and as aforesaid, he passed an order to the effect that revocation of the order of suspension and the posting of Sri De would not be in the interest of the Bank. From the circulars issued by the Government of India, it appears that by the Government Order, dated 7th September, 1965, it was decided that in case of Officers under suspension, the investigation should be completed and the charge-sheet should be filed in a Court of competent jurisdiction in cases of prosecution or served on the Officer in cases of departmental proceeding within six months as a rule. If the investigation is likely to take more time, it should be considered whether the suspension order should be revoked and the Officer should be permitted to resume duty. If the presence of the Officers is considered detrimental to the collection of evidence or it is likely to tamper with the evidence, he may be transferred on revocation of the suspension order. By the Government order, dated 4th February 1971, the earlier order, dated 7th September, 1965 was modified partially and it has been held to the following effect :
"In partial modification of the above order it has been decided that every effort should be made to file the charge-sheet in Court or serve the charge sheet on the Government servant, as the case may be, within three months of the date of suspension, and in cases in which it may not be possible to do so, the Disciplinary Authority should report the matter to the next higher Authority explaining the reasons for the delay."
7. By subsequent Government order, dated 16th December, 1972 it has been directed that the Government have already reduced the period of suspension during investigation barring exceptional cases which are to be reported to the higher Authority, from six months to three months. It has now been decided that while the orders contained in the office memorandum, dated 4th February, 1971 would continue to the operative with regard to cases pending in courts in respect of the period of suspension, pending investigation before the filing of a charge sheet in the Court as also in respect of serving of the charge sheet on the Government servant in cases of departmental proceedings, in cases other than those pending in Courts, the total period of suspension both in respect of investigation and disciplinary proceedings should not ordinarily exceed six months. In exceptional cases where it is not possible to adhere to the time limit, the disciplinary authority should report the matter to the next higher Authority, explaining the reasons for the delay. By a subsequent Government Memorandum, dated 14th September, 1978 it has been held that in spite of the instruction contained in the earlier memorandum, instances has come to the notice in which the Government servants had to continue to remain under suspension for unduly long period. Such unduly long suspension while putting the employee concerned to undue hardship, involves payment of subsistence allowance without the employee performing any useful service to the Government. It is, therefore, impressed on all the authorities concerned that they should scrupulously observe the time limit laid down in the earlier Government memorandum and review the cases of suspension to see whether continued suspension in all cases was really necessary. The authority superior to the Disciplinary Authority should also give appropriate directions to the Disciplinary Authority keeping in view of the provisions contained in the Government circulars. The writ petitioner Sri De contended that under the order of this Court passed by the learned Trial Judge in the writ proceeding, the Deputy General Manager (P), Punjab National Bank has taken into consideration of the Continuation of the order of suspension of Sri De. The said Deputy General Manager has definitely come to the finding that the delay in completion of the criminal proceeding cannot be attributed to the writ petitioner Sri De but as such delay was also not for any reason which could be attributed to the Bank and as it is open to Sri De to make appropriate submission to the court concerned for expeditious disposal of the case, the revocation order was not to be passed in the interest of the Bank. It has been only bladly stated in the said order of the Deputy General Manager (P) that "therefore, revocation of the suspension and posting anywhere will not be in the interest of the Bank". No reason whatsoever has been indicated why such revocation after such a long lapse of time and after completion of investigation and submission of charge-sheet should be detrimental to the interest of the Bank.
8. The learned Trial Judge in the aforesaid facts has come to the finding that the reason for not revoking the order of suspension of Sri De as contained in the order, dated 18th October, 1984 of the Deputy General Manager (P) of the Punjab National Bank does not appear to be reasonable and convincing. The learned Trial Judge has, therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, directed that the order of suspension will remain stayed and the respondents should not give any effect to such order of suspension. The writ petitioner would be entitled to full pay and allowances which he would have been entitled if the suspension order had not been passed. The writ petitioner will not, however, join the duties unless specifically asked for by the respondent Bank and the respondent Bank will be at liberty to post the petitioner in such a post or in such a place as may deem fit and proper in the facts of the case. As aforesaid, the Punjab National Bank and its Officers have preferred the instant appeal against the aforesaid judgment of the learned Trial Judge without impleading respondent No. 1, Union of India.
9. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant Bank Authorities has contended that the writ petition was liable to be dismissed in limine as this court was not competent to entertain the writ petition. It has been contended that no part of the cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this court. It has been submitted that Sri De while serving as an Accountant in the Bank's Branch at Patna was placed under suspension and the criminal cases had been started against Sri De in Jodhpur (Rajasthan) and in Patna. The Head Office of the Bank is in New Delhi and the representation for revocation of the order of suspension and consequential posting of the writ petitioner was made by the writ petitioner in the Head Office in Delhi and the Deputy General Manager (P) has passed the order rejecting the prayer of the writ petitioner to revoke the order of suspension. In the aforesaid circumstances, it cannot be contended that any part of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this court and the writ petition is, therefore, liable to be dismissed in limine. The learned counsel for the Bank has submitted that as the writ petitioner is under suspension and as he is a resident of Calcutta, on his representation, for the sake of convenience of the writ petitioner Sri De, the Head Office in Delhi had decided that his suspension allowance should be paid from a Branch Office at Park Street in Calcutta and accordingly Sri De has been receiving his suspension allowance from Calcutta Branch Office. The learned Counsel of the Bank has further submitted that the Government circulars referred to and relied on by the writ petitioner Sri De also do not come in aid of the writ petitioner. It has been submitted that the order of suspension of Sri De was automatic because of his arrest and detention for more than 48 hours in connection with the complaints made to the police. The criminal cases are pending before the competent Criminal Courts and the Bank administration cannot be held liable for the delay and laches or negligence in the matter of disposal of criminal cases. The learned Counsel has submitted that the Deputy General Manager (P) in disposing of the representation of the writ petitioner for revoking his order of suspension has rightly held that although there had been an inordinate delay in disposing of the criminal cases and although the writ petitioner could not be held responsible for such delay, the Bank was also not responsible for such delay and the writ petitioner was entitled to move before the Criminal Courts for appropriate orders to be passed in the said criminal trials. He has submitted that the Deputy General Manager (P) has held that in the interest of the Bank, the order of suspension should not be revoked and the petitioner should not be posted on revocation of such order of suspension. Accordingly, it cannot be contended, without indicating any reason, the representation of the writ petitioner was disposed of by the Bank Administration and the order of suspension should have been revoked in the facts of the case. It has been further contended that the writ petitioner Sri De was an Accountant at Jodhpur Branch and Patna Branch and there are serious allegations of breach of trust by Sri De and his complicity in criminal activities for defrauding the Bank. In the aforesaid circumstances, if the Bank Administration is of the view that the writ petitioner should not be allowed to join his duties in the Bank and the order of suspension should continue unless he is ex-operated of the charges levelled against him in the criminal trials, it cannot be held that such view is perverse and unreasonable for which interference by the writ court is called for.
10. The writ petitioner Sri De has appeared in person and he has submitted that he is suffering extremely acute financial problem and he has been a physically and mentally wreck for the untold miseries suffered by him since 1975. Sri Das has contended that it is an admitted position that during the period of suspension the petitioner is residing within the territorial jurisdiction of this court and in recognition of the said fact, the Bank Administration had arranged for payment of subsistence allowance to the writ petitioner from a Branch Office in Calcutta. The writ petitioner has been making all correspondence with the Bank Administration from Calcutta and is also receiving replies from Bank Administration within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. In the aforesaid circumstances, it cannot be contended that no part of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Sri De has also contended that in the writ petition, the order of suspension passed by the Bank Administration at Patna is not under challenge. The petitioner has contended that under the existing policy of the Government and Bank Management the case of suspension of the petitioner is got to be reviewed and in the facts and circumstances of the case the order of suspension of the petitioner should have been revoked. For the said purpose, he has made representation to the Head Office in Delhi from within the jurisdiction of this Court and admitting the position that the petitioner has been residing within the jurisdiction of this Court, the Bank Administration in Delhi have been making correspondence with Sri De at an address which is within the territorial jurisdiction this Court. In the aforesaid circumstances, the writ petition is maintainable before this Court.
11. Coming to the merits of the case Sri De has submitted that the Government Circulars referred to hereinbefore clearly indicate that even in cases where charge-sheet has been submitted by the police and criminal trial is pending in a Criminal Court, the case of revocation of suspension is required to be considered. He has contended that the circulars clearly indicate that it is a paramount consideration of the Government of India and also of the administration of a nationalised Bank that the service of a Bank employee should be utilised as far as possible without any unreasonable delay and an employee should not be permitted to receive suspension allowances without rendering any service to the concerned Bank. He has also submitted that the Bank Administration has not taken proper steps in expediting the criminal trials and relevant papers and documents were not forwarded either to the Court or to the Police with an anxiety to expedite the criminal trial. He has submitted that it will appear from the annexures made to the application filed by Sri De for appropriate direction on the appellants in this appeal that the delay in concluding the trial in Jodhpur and Patna Courts was definitely attributable to the Bank. On numerous occasions, the witnesses from the Bank failed to turn up and the criminal trials had to be adjourned. A xerox copy of the order-sheet of Case No. 1326/79 in the case of State of Rajasthan v. D.K. De pending before the learned Magistrate, Jodhpur has been annexed to the said application and it will appear from the said annexure that because of the failure of the Bank to produce witnesses in the trial, the trial had to be adjourned on numerous occasions spread over a number of years. From the order-sheet it transpires that in 1980, 1981 and 1982 the criminal trial could not be proceeded either for the failure of the Bank to produce witnesses or for the failure of the Bank to give correct address of the witnesses since transferred. It appears that on 28th July, 1982, Sri De made an application with a prayer for speedy trial and on 9th November, 1982 an order was passed by the learned Magistrate that day to day trial should be held because the witnesses for the prosecution did not turn up. From the order-sheet, dated 8th October, 1983, 8th December, 1983, 17th July, 1983 and on several dates in May, July and September, 1985, it appears that the criminal trial could not be held because no witnesses for the prosecution had turned up. Even in December, 1985, the Manager of the Bank although present in Court wanted to be examined at a future date and on subsequent date he again made an application for postponment of the hearing on the ground that he was sick. Sri De has, therefore, submitted that he is absolutely helpless in the matter of being an accused in a criminal case and he is suffering untold miseries because of the indifferent attitude being taken by the Bank to prolong the hearing of the criminal trials. So far as the Patna case is concerned, a xerox copy of the application by informant Punjab National Bank in Case No. 3588/75 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Patna has been annexed by the respondent Sri De in the application for interim direction. It will appear from the said application, dated 8th March, 1983 that except one witness Sri Anantram, the attendance of other witnesses was not secured for giving evidence in the case and a prayer was made to adjourn the case after giving sufficient time to produce witnesses. Sri De has, therefore, submitted that the Deputy Manager (P) was absolutely incorrect in holding that the delay in completing the criminal trials was not attributable to the Bank. Sri De has submitted that the criminal cases had been instituted in 1975 and within these long span of 12 years, all possible investigations had been completed and charge-sheets on the basis of investigation had also been filed long back. Sri De having been placed under suspension since 1975 is, therefore, not in a position to tamper with the evidence in any manner whatsoever. He has also contended that in the supplementary affidavit affirmed by Sri De in connection with the interim order made in the appeal, Sri De has contended that S.K. Saha and Sri K.N. Singh of Punjab National Bank, Patna Branch are facing criminal trials but they have been allowed to resume duties. In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Bank, it has been stated that the guidelines for placing Bank employees under suspension have been followed in the case of S.K. Saha. The Bank has admitted that Sri S.K. Saha, an Officer of the Bank has been charged for taking bribe from the poor borrower. Sri De has submitted that the Bank is not following any uniform policy and an unreasonable and harsh attitude has been taken against the petitioner which amounts to malice in law and fact and if the order of suspension continues for further period it is quite likely that the respondent Sri De will not be in a position either to contest the criminal trials and to take out his existence and he will simply perish under the calculated pressure given by the Bank. He has, therefore, submitted that the learned Trial Judge is justified in passing the order directing the Bank administration to stay the order of suspension. Sri De has submitted that the learned Trial Judge has directed that the writ petitioner should not join his duties unless he is asked to join and the Bank administration would be at liberty to give suitable posting at suitable place to the petitioner. He has, therefore, submitted that the appeal should be dismissed with costs.
12. After considering the respective contentions of the parties in the appeal, it appears to us that there is no manner of doubt the writ petitioner respondent Sri De had suffered serious hardship and is still suffering immense hardship for remaining under suspension for almost 12 years. It also appears to us that the criminal trials have not been proceeded diligently and the Punjab National Bank and its Officers have very casually proceeded in the matter and have definitely contributed for unusual delay in concluding the said trials. It is really unfortunate that the criminal trials are pending for such a long time and the respondent Sri De has been compelled to defend the criminal trials at a distant stations like Jodhpur and Patna from Calcutta for all these years while suffering an order of suspension. It also appears to us that the Government circulars referred to hereinbefore clearly point out that pendency of the criminal trial by itself will not imply that an employee of the Bank against whom criminal case has been instituted and charge-sheet has been given should remain in suspension until the criminal trial is finally concluded. The circulars indicate that even in the case of pendency of a criminal trial, the Bank administration will have to review the situation and decide whether continuance of suspension is desirable in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Government circulars clearly indicate that it is the anxiety of the Government that there should not be unnecessary delay in completing the departmental proceeding and criminal cases and all efforts should be taken to expedite the criminal trial and the departmental proceeding against the delinquent Bank employees. The said circulars also indicate that unless exigencies of the circumstances require that a Bank employee should remain in suspension, the concerned Bank employee should be utilised gainfully by the Bank and payment of subsistence allowance for a long period without obtaining any service from the Bank employee is not desirable. In the aforesaid circumstances, it appears to us that the order of suspension passed against the writ petitioner respondent Sri De should have been reviewed long back and it was only desirable that the service of Sri De should have been utilised gainfully. The Deputy General Manager (P) has just stated that in the interest of the Bank the order of, suspension should not be reviewed. But he has not indicated any reason as to how the interest of the Bank would be better served by continuing the suspension for more than 12 years in the facts of the case. In the aforesaid circumstances, the direction passed by the learned Trial Judge appears to be reasonable and no interference is called for by the Appeal Court. So far as the question of jurisdiction of this court, to entertain the writ petition is concerned, it appears to us that in the special facts and circumstances of the case it cannot be contended that no part of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this court. The writ petitioner is a suspended employee of the Bank and admittedly he is residing within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court during the period of suspension to the knowledge of the Bank. Admittedly, he is making the correspondence from his place of residence within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court with the Head Office of the Bank in Delhi and on the basis of his representation, his suspension allowance is being paid from a Branch Office in Calcutta. The Bank administration had also given replies to the representation of Sri De to consider his prayer for revocation of the order of suspension at his residence within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court and he has felt aggrieved by such decision communicated to him at the address within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. In the aforesaid circumstances, it cannot be contended that no part of cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. It may be noted that in the matter of interpretation of the scope and ambit of constitutional provisions a liberal construction as far as practicable should be given. It is not like a case where a writ petitioner has been usually carrying on his business, profession or duties and functions outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Court and a formal communication has been sent to the writ petitioner at an address within the territorial jurisdiction of this court and only on the basis of such communication a writ petition is sought to be moved before this Court althrough from all other facts, the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the writ petition cannot be established. From the facts and circumstances of the instant case it appears to us that the writ petitioner is a suspended employee and to the knowledge of the Bank he has been residing within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court during all these years while on suspension and it will hardly be possible for him to maintain a writ petition in the Delhi High Court only for the purpose of contending that the Bank administration is not considering the case of revocation of the order of suspension in his favour more so when he cannot afford to engage a counsel and is compelled to appear in person. In the aforesaid circumstances, we are inclined to accept the contention of the respondent Sri De that in the special facts and circumstances of the case the writ petition is maintainable before this Court. The appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed, but we make no order as to costs.
13. A prayer has been made before us by the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants for stay of the operation of the order but in the facts of the case, we are not inclined to pass any order of stay as prayed for.
K.M. Yusuf, J.
14. I agree.