Court No. - 30
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 66232 of 2012 Petitioner :- Mohan Swaroop Anami Respondent :- S.B.I. Thru Its G.M. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,Anita Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Vipin Sinha,S.C.,Satish Chaturvedi
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents and Sri Satish Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the contesting respondents-Bankand perused the record.
Present petition has been filed challenging challenging the order dated 24.7.2012 passed by the respondent no. 2 and the order dated 11.4.2012 passed by the respondent no. 3. A further prayer in the nature of mandamus has been made to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner on his post with all consequential benefits and pay the salary regularly month to month.
At the very outset, Sri Satish Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the respondents-Bank has raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has an alternative remedy before the Industrial Tribunal and as such, the present petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on a judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of State Bank of India and others vs. Neelam Nag, (2016) 9 SCC 491.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the matter is pending since long and as such, ordinarily the petitioner should not be relegated to the alternative remedy as it is not an absolute bar. It is further submitted that there was violation of principles of natural justice and as such, there is no legal impediment in entertaining the present petition.
Be that as it may, this Court is of the opinion that since there may be certain factual aspects while deciding the present petition, therefore, the alternative remedy before the Industrial Tribunal would be appropriate remedy in the present case and in view of judgement of Neelam Nag (supra), the petitioner is liable to be relegated before the Industrial Tribunal.
At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it may be provided that industrial dispute before the Industrial Tribunal may not be thrown out on the ground of delay or laches.
Accordingly, present petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. However, it is provided that in case industrial dispute is raised in accordance with law before the Industrial Tribunal, the same may be entertained without raising any objection with regard to delay.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 28.2.2018 Abhishek