The petitioner in the contempt case contend that the petitioner has not been permitted to operate the account, as directed in Annexure A1 judgment. Specific contention of the writ petitioner was that the petitioner was dismissed from service and the dismissal order was under challenge, before the appropriate forum provided under the statute. In the meanwhile, the petitioner was not permitted to enter into the Bank and operate the Saving Bank Account, was the plea urged when the matter was heard on 21.02.2014. 2. The challenge in the writ petition being only as against the suspension order subsequent to which disciplinary proceedings, culminated in dismissal, this Court was of the opinion that the writ petition need not be kept pending. The petitioner was left to challenge the dismissal, before the appropriate forum. However this Court also directed that the restrain order, if any, restraining the petitioner from entering COC 1308/2014 : 2 :
into the premises of the Bank shall not been forced, since the petitioner was a valid account holder. The petitioner was directed to be permitted to operate his bank account.
3. The petitioner now contends that the petitioner had a savings bank account, as also a current account, which he intends to operate. The learned counsel for the bank submits that the current account is an overdraft facility granted to its employees and the petitioner having now been dismissed from service, there could be no further operation in the overdraft facility. The learned counsel for the petitioner produced before me the passbook, which clearly shows that the current account is an overdraft facility and as on 22.07.2006, there is a debit of Rs.48,959/- in the account. The said amount is due and payable to the respondent Bank as is evident from the entries made in the passbook. It is not clear as to what is the present balance in the account.
4. The Bank definitely would be entitled to discontinue the operation in the Over Draft account, especially since such overdraft facility has been granted to the employees and the petitioner is now terminated from service.
COC 1308/2014 : 3 :
If there is any credit in the overdraft account necessarily the petitioner would be entitled to withdraw the same, if the petitioner does not have any other liability to the Bank. The judgment did not intend to permit the petitioner to carry on an overdraft facility which was granted only to the employees, especially after the petitioner has been dismissed from service.
Contempt petition closed with the above observations.
Sd/-
(K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge