Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1588 (HP)

Kishan Chand Tundkia v. State Bank of India

2016-08-04

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR, SANDEEP SHARMA

body2016
JUDGMENT : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. By the medium of this writ petition, the writ petitioner has sought the following relief amongst others, on the grounds taken in the memo of the writ petition: “i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to pay and release the subsistence allowance equal to half of his substantive salary plus full allowances alongwith interest after completing one year of suspension period w.e.f. 21.2.2013 to 12.5.2015. The respondents may further be directed to pay and release alongwith arrears and interest the subsistence allowance on the basis of salary revision allowed w.e.f. 1.11.2011 in view of State Bank of India e-Circular dated 21.9.2015.” 2. It appears that the writ petitioner was placed under suspension on 15th February, 2012 and inquiry was initiated against him, which has finally resulted in his removal from service, in terms of order, dated 5th May, 2015 (Annexure P-3). 3. It is apt to reproduce the relevant portion of the order, dated 5th May, 2015 (Annexure P-3) herein: “4. You appeared before me for the personal hearing on the said date and after carefully listening to your submissions during personal hearing regarding charges, I am convinced as to your submissions to some extant. I, therefore, keeping in view the gravity of proved/partly proved charges, have decided to inflict the penalty of “Removal from service” in terms of Rule 67(i) of SBIOSR. Further, the period of suspension will be treated as such i.e., not on duty and you will not be entitled for wages, perks and any other benefits during this period other than the subsistence allowance which has already been paid” to meet the ends of justice. I order accordingly.” 4. It is worthwhile to record herein that the writ petitioner has not questioned the order of removal from service (Annexure P3). In terms of the doctrine of merger, all the orders made right from placing him under suspension till the passing of Annexure P3 have merged into Annexure P3. 5. The writ petitioner has to question the order of removal from service (Annexure P-3) to seek the other reliefs including the relief sought in this writ petition, if he is entitled to. 6. In view of the above, the writ petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, the same is dismissed in limine. 7. 5. The writ petitioner has to question the order of removal from service (Annexure P-3) to seek the other reliefs including the relief sought in this writ petition, if he is entitled to. 6. In view of the above, the writ petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, the same is dismissed in limine. 7. It is made clear that this order shall not come in the way of the writ petitioner in questioning the order of removal from service and to seek the relief sought in this writ petition.