Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Nov 11: The High Court today dismissed the plea of former Chairman Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd Parvaiz Ahmad Nengroo seeking setting aside of decision of Government for ousting him as chairman cum-Chief Executive Officer of the bank.
Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey in an elaborated judgment recorded that the nomination of Nengroo as Director on the Board and his appointment as Chairman-cum-Chief Executive Officer of the Bank was contractual in nature and not governed by any Statute or the service conditions ordinarily applicable to the employees of the Bank.
Referring to the ruling of Division Bench of other High Court wherein it was held that contractual duties are enforceable as matters of private law by ordinary contractual remedies such as damages, injunction, specific performance and declaration, Justice Magrey dismissed the petition of Nengroo by recording that the same is not maintainable before this court.
Court, however, left it open for Nengroo to approach the Civil Court for seeking enforcement of his contractual relationship and redressal of his contractual dispute(s) with the Bank.
On challenging the decision of the Government whereby he has been ousted from the post of Chairman cum-Chief Executive Officer of the Bank, court said the remedy available to the petitioner lies in the Civil Court.
The communication No. FD/Bkg/21/2019 dated 08.06.2019 addressed by the Additional Secretary to the Government, Finance Department, of the erstwhile State of Jammu & Kashmir and to the Company Secretary, J&K Bank Limited, conveying the decisions of the Government taken by it in exercise of the powers under Article 69(iii) of Articles of Association of the Bank, that he (Nengroo) shall cease to be Director on the Board of Directors of the Bank.
The case of Nengroo before the Court is that even when he was nominated as Government Director on the Board and was appointed as Chairman-cum-Chief Executive Officer of the Bank, he continued to be in service of the Bank unabated and uninterrupted and, therefore, continued to be governed by the service conditions of the Bank, and that since the Bank, being an instrumentality of the State, is amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court as such challenging communication dated 09.07.2019, which conveyed to him that he is deemed to have retired from the service of the Bank with effect from 06.10.2016, is maintainable.
In that context, while referring to the Rules, Court said, the petitioner is deemed to have retired from the Service of the Bank with effect from 06.10.2016. Therefore, his tenure being the Chairman and CEO of the Bank is not governed by the Service Rules of the Bank.
“Consequently, any dispute sought to be raised by him in relation thereto, including challenge to communication dated 09.07.2019, can’t be gone into by this Court in its writ jurisdiction. In that view, this writ petition to that extent as well is not maintainable”, read the judgment.
So far as the prayer of Nengroo for a direction to the respondents for release of all perquisites and benefits due and payable to him in law is concerned, Court said, it is admitted that he was in the service of the Bank till 06.10.2016, the date he was deemed to have retired from the service of the Bank.
Justice Magrey said, this Court could make a direction that in the event he is eligible to pensionary benefits under the Pension Regulations in question in lieu of his service till 06.10.2016 and he applies in accordance therewith for grant of such pensionary benefits, the Bank authorities shall consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with the applicable rules and pass appropriate orders.
But, court added that it is dealing with the petition ‘in limine’ and leaving the petitioner free to approach the civil court for seeking his main reliefs, such a direction may amount to treading into the merits of the case and may prejudice the petitioner in the civil court in seeking his all the reliefs. Therefore, by way of abundant caution no direction is made in that regard.
Nengroo was appointed as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Bank for a period of three years with effect from 06.10.2016 on the terms and conditions enumerated in annexure to the RBI’s letter.
It is on 08.06.2019 the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Srinagar, received a complaint from one Syed Kounsar Baihaqi daughter of Ghulam Mohammad Baihaqi of Dandoosa alleging backdoor appointments of Banking Attendants/Assistant Banking Associates in the Bank on which FIR no.10/2019 for offences U/S 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of J&K Prevention of Corruption Act, Svt., 2006 and Section 120-B RPC was registered at Police Station, ACB, against Nengroo and some other officers of the Bank.
RBI, in its reply in opposition to the writ petition of Nengroo has taken a preliminary objection that his petition is not maintainable.
“As seen above, the respondents have taken preliminary objections to the maintainability of this writ petition. Therefore, this Court is of the view that it would be appropriate to first deal with the preliminary objections raised on behalf of the respondents. In the event it is found that the writ petition is not maintainable, the merits would not need to be gone into”, Justice Magrey recorded.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
