Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State Bank Of India vs Ram Gopal Yadav on 29 November, 2018
Bench: Sangeet Lodha, Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1652/2018
1. State Bank Of India, Through Its Chairman, Corporate
Centre, Navy Mumbai, 400614.
2. The Chief General Manager, (FI And MF) Corporate
Centre, Navy Mumbai, 400614
3. The General Manager, (F.I.) State Bank Of India, C-
Scheme, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.
4. The Deputy General Manager, (FI And GS Deptt.)
Administrative And Business Unit, C-Scheme, Tilak Marg,
Jaipur.
5. The Deputy Manager, (B And O) Administrative And
Business Office, C-Scheme, Tilak Marg, Jaipur.
6. The Regional Manager, Regional Commercial Office-III,
Administration Office, A-23, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur Zone,
Jodhpur.
----Appellants
Versus
Ram Gopal Yadav S/o Shri Rameshwarlalji, Aged About 29 Years,
B/c Yadav, At Present Resided At C/o Kanwara Ram Choudhary
S/o Shri Jaita Ramji, Basni Lachha, Manaklao, District Jodhpur
(B.C. Code 66700001).
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Dr. Sachin Acharya
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devendra Soni for
Mr. Sukesh Bhati
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Order 29/11/2018 This special appeal is directed against judgment dated 21.06.2018 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby the writ petition preferred by the respondent questioning the action of the appellants in corporatization of Individual Business Correspondents (BCs) has been allowed and the appellants herein (2 of 2) [SAW-1652/2018] are directed to continue the respondent as BC directly with the appellant-Bank and not to terminate his service so as to replace him by another set of contractual employees or Corporate Business Correspondents, unless there is a performance deficit on his part.
Issue notice.
Mr. Devendra Soni, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Sukesh Bhati accepts notice for the respondent.
The appeal is reported to be barred by limitation for 53 days. It is accompanied by an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The application seeking condonation of delay is not opposed by the counsel appearing for the respondent. Hence, the application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
Learned counsel for the parties submitted that the controversy involved in this appeal is set at rest by this Court vide decision dated 28.11.2018 rendered in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.1063/2018 (State Bank of India & Ors. Vs. Ashish Kumar & Ors.) and accordingly this special appeal deserves to be allowed.
Accordingly this special appeal is allowed in terms of the judgment dated 28.11.2018 rendered in State Bank of India & Ors. Vs. Ashish Kumar & Ors. (supra). The order under appeal dated 21.06.2018 is set aside and the writ petition preferred by the respondent is dismissed.
(DINESH MEHTA),J (SANGEET LODHA),J
110/Anurag
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)