AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Let the affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept with the record. The petitioners are directed to put in the deficit Court fees in course of this
week. In default, the writ petition should be treated as maintainable only in respect of the petitioner no. 1.Heard the learned advocates for the parties.
The writ petition should be decided on affidavits.
Let an affidavit in opposition be filed within two weeks after the reopening of the Court after the summer vacation. Let an affidavit in reply thereto, if
any, be filed within two weeks thereafter. Let the matter appear for hearing in the Combined Monthly List of July, 2018 after the first 200 matters
under that heading.
After hearing the learned advocates for the parties and after going through the order impugned in the writ petition I am of the view that this is not a fit
case for grant of an interim order. The balance of convenience and inconvenience also does not lie in favour of passing an interim order staying the
operation of the order dated February 23, 2018.
If the content of the order, being annexure P-9, is valid and there has been any overpayment made by the respondents in favour of the petitioners, the
respondents have a right to recover the same from the salary of the petitioners in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Chandi
Prasad Uniyal vs. State of Uttarakhand & Others, reported in (2012)8 SCC 417 wherein the right of the authorities to recover an amount which had
been unjustly advanced to employees had been recognised barring of few exceptions as the money the authorities would be dealing is the public
money.
The learned advocate for the respondents has specifically assured the Court that this office memorandum is applicable only in respect of the Office
Assistant-M who had joined or promoted in the bank on or after May 1, 2010. The petitioners do not come within this category.
It is made clear that one of the reasons for not granting any interim order is that even if the petitioners ultimately succeed the bank may be directed to
make payment of the amount to the petitioners if they are otherwise entitled to the same but a recovery by the bank of any excess payment is likely to
be visited with various imponderable difficulties.
It is made clear that any action taken by the respondents shall abide by the result of the writ petition.