Short counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Alok Saxena, who files Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondents, which is taken on record.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is finally decided.
The present petition has been filed praying for a mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the total pension to the petitioner for the month of August, 2019 and also pay the same each and every month regularly. A further prayer is for a mandamus commanding the respondents to refund the total amount of gratuity which is alleged to have been adjusted forcibly against the loans of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been drawing the pension from the pension account maintained with Canara Bank of Aminabad branch. It is contended that the respondent-Bank has acted arbitrarily inasmuch the amount of gratuity which was payable to the petitioner has already been adjusted by the respondent-Bank towards the loans and now since August, 2019 the amount of pension which is credited in his pension account is also debited from his account and transferred to the loan accounts which is said to be the installments towards the loan accounts.
This Court vide order dated 28.11.2019 noticing the repeated absence of learned counsel for the respondent-Bank had passed the following order:-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
None responds on behalf of the respondents despite the list having been revised and the names of Sri Vinay Shanker, Sri Akhil Pratap Singh and Sri Yogesh Chandra Bhatt having been indicated in the cause list from the side of the respondents.
The matter pertains to the petitioner not having been granted pension since August 2019.
This Court vide order dated 26.09.2019 had required Sri Yogesh Chandra Bhatt, who had appeared on behalf of the respondents, to file a short counter affidavit. Thereafter, when the matter was listed on 07.11.2019, an illness slip had been sent by Sri Yogesh Chandra Bhatt and thereafter again on 21.11.2019, the matter was adjourned on account of sanctioned leave of Sri Akhil Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank.
Today, again none appears on behalf of the respondents.
Withholding of pension of a retired employee on the one hand and non-appearance of learned counsel appearing for the respondents resulting in repeated adjournments on the other hand cannot be appreciated by this Court.
In this view of the matter, let the Assistant General Manager, Canara Bank, Human Resource Management Section, Circle Office, Vipin Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow i.e. respondent no.2, appear in person along with relevant records to assist the Court on 17.12.2019.
List this case on 17.12.2019.
Office shall communicate this order to respondent no.2 in writing within 48 hours."
Today, in pursuance to the aforesaid order, Sri Rajnish Sonkar, Assistant General Manager, Canara Bank, Human Resource Management Section, Vipin Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, is present in Court.
Sri Alok Saxena, learned counsel appearing for respondent-Bank, has extended unconditional apology towards the lapse on the part of earlier counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-Bank and assured that such action would never happen in future.
On merits, Sri Saxena submits that the petitioner is an ex-employee of the Bank. The petitioner was having various loan accounts with the Bank. For three loan accounts, the petitioner had given a letter dated 19.10.2012, a copy of which is Annexure SCA-1 to the short counter affidavit by which he had prayed for adjustment of gratuity amount towards the said three loan accounts which had been done. Thus, it is contended that there is no fault on the part of respondent-Bank in adjusting the amount of gratuity towards the aforesaid loan accounts which has been done in pursuance to the consent given by the petitioner himself.
So far as the adjustment of loan installment from the pension being paid to the petitioner is concerned, Sri Saxena has drawn the attention of this Court towards the letter dated 31.10.2013, a copy of which is Annexure SCA-2 to the short counter affidavit, whereby the petitioner had requested the Bank that the routine arrears towards two other housing loans be adjusted from the pension arrears and/or computation of pension. As such, once there was a default on the part of the petitioner in paying the aforesaid amount consequently his pension account has been debited and the amount has been transferred to the loan accounts. It is contended that again such action of debiting pension from the pension account of the petitioner has been done on account of consent given by the petitioner and as such there is no illegality in the said act also.
Upon learned counsel for the petitioner being confronted with the aforesaid, he contends on the basis of instructions that have been given by the petitioner himself that he does not have any grouse against the bank in having adjusted the amount of gratuity towards three loan accounts. So far as the adjustment of pension towards the loan installment is concerned, it is contended that the petitioner would be willing to have an amount of Rs.7500/- per month adjusted from his pension account.
To the said offer, Sri Saxena, on the basis of instructions given by Sri Rajnish Sonkar, Assistant General Manager, Canara Bank, Human Resource Management Section, Vipin Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, has no objection.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent Bank, in view of concession given by the petitioner, to adjust an amount of Rs.7500/- per month from the pension account of the petitioner which would be towards the loan accounts of the petitioner every month. The said arrangement shall be followed from this month itself.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 A. Katiyar