1.This writ petition is filed seeking to quash Exts.P4 and P5 to the extent they direct the second respondent to recover amounts paid to the petitioners and also for consequential declaration as to non enforcement of notice issued by the Board of Directors of the Bank.
2.None appears for the parties. Perused affidavit and materials produced therewith. Perused the counter affidavit of the second respondent. The case is being decided accordingly.
3.Ext.P3 is intimation of the decision of the Board of Directors of the second respondent. The matters dealt with relate to audit objections on payment of bonus from 1997 to 2001. The notice, Ext.P3, is issued on 11.12.2009 and the decision to recover was taken in the meeting of the Board of Directors on 09.12.2009, WPC2855/10 -2- obviously, at the prompting of the departmental officials as is discernible from the opening paragraph of Ext.P3.
4.The Bank was under the administrative control of an administrator during 2001-02 and the administrator had issued an order on 28.02.2002 stating that the bonus paid to the employees for the period 1996 - 2001 was in excess.
5.Now, it is profitable to quote the following from the counter affidavit of the second respondent Bank:
"3. It is submitted that the Bank has been paying bonus to its employees at the rate of 20% of the salary drawn by them. The payment of bonus has been on the basis of the resolution of the General body of the Bank and the provisions contained in the Byelaws by which the employees are entitled to receive not more than 20% of the salary as bonus. The General body of the Bank on its meeting held on 29.03.1998 considering the WPC2855/10 -3- profits of the Bank had resolved to grant maximum 20% bonus to its employees, 8.33% as bonus and the remaining amount as customary bonus."
6.Obviously therefore, the employees had enjoyed what is given to them before 2001 and this was promptly taken up by the administrator as well. There is some justification by the employees in stating that what was given to them was at par with what was being paid even earlier as bonus component. That is why the excess amount was treated by the Bank as customary bonus. After a fairly long time, it would be impermissible for the Board of the Bank to order recovery from its employees, more particularly when the auditors' objection and the resultant directions of the statutory authorities were to either write off the amounts or to recover it. The abrupt decision taken through Ext.P3 merely because the Board stood answerable in the light of the letters of the statutory authorities is insufficient to sustain recovery of amounts paid more than seven years before steps WPC2855/10 -4- were initiated for recovery. It can also be seen that having regard to the contents of Ext.P3, there is also no fair application of mind by the Board of Directors as to whether the amount should be written off or recovered. There is no ground to effect any recovery as is sought to be done by the issuance of Ext.P3. In the result, the impugned Ext.P3 notice is quashed and Exts.P4 and P5 passed by respondent Nos.3 and 4 respectively are also quashed insofar as it amounts to any authorisation or direction to recover the over paid bonus from the petitioners. It is hereby declared that no amounts as stated in Ext.P3 are recoverable from the petitioners. This writ petition is ordered accordingly.
(THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) jg-23/3