RANCHI, India, Dec. 19 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Nov. 19:

1. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing the Memo No.127 dated 27.07.2009 passed by the Managing Director-cumMember Secretary i.e. 6th respondent, upon the instruction of 3rd respondent, whereby the 6th respondent has rejected the claim of the petitioner for arrears of salary of 54 months, which was due between the period from April 1994 till February 2006.

Petitioner has further prayed for quashing of paragraph No.1, 2, 3, 4 of memo no. 77, dated 20.05.2009, issued by the 6th respondent.

2. The instant writ application was filed in the year 2010, and thereafter, much water has flown and several other similarly situated Paid Managers knocked the door of this Court by filing respective writ applications, and this Court has directed the respondent bank to pay the arear of salary. One of such case is the case of Dhiren Kumar Mandal, in WP(S) No. 6760 of 2013 wherein the Coordinate Bench of this Court after referring several writ applications being WPS No. 1901 of 2006, WPS No. 4778 of 2006 and WPS No. 5033 of 2012 has observed that all those writ applications were decided in favour of the respective petitioners who were the Paid Managers and the different Benches have ordered that the petitioners are entitled to get payment for the aforesaid period as they have worked during the aforesaid period as Paid Manager. Thereafter, the Coordinate Bench has directed as under.

"Under the said circumstance, I allow this writ application and direct the Managing Director, Deoghar-Jamtara Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Deoghar (respondent no. 2) to pay the salary of the petitioner for the period 1.1.1999 to 10.05.2004 within two months from the date of receipt or production of this order."

3. Against the order passed in W.P.(S)6760/13, an appeal was filed being LPA No. 418/2019 which was dismissed on the ground of limitation; however, the Division Bench has also dealt merits of the case. Further, the order passed by the Writ Court, upheld by the Division Bench, was further assailed by the RespondentBank before the Hon'ble Apex Court, which was also dismissed.

4. Learned counsel for the Respondents fairly submits that they are ready to pay the entire amount, but they need some time as they are not having any funds. He lastly submits that if sometimes be granted to them, they will pay the due salary after calculation.

5. This Court is not concerned as to whether the respondent-bank is having funds or not, rather; this Court is only concerned with regard to order passed by the Coordinate Bench in different writ applications and also the fact that several similarly situated persons have already received the due salary.

6. Having regard aforesaid facts and circumstances, the instant application deserves to be allowed and accordingly, the impugned order is quashed and set aside in view of the aforesaid finding.

The respondent-bank is directed to pay the salary to the petitioner for the period of 54 months, i.e. from April 1994 to February 2006 within a period of 16 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

7. It goes without saying that the respondent bank would be entitled to adjust the same amount from the State, which was directed by the Division Bench as well as the several Coordinate Bench, by way of grant in aid.

8. Accordingly, the instant writ application is hereby allowed. I.As, if any, is also closed.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.