Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20171 of 2019 Petitioner :- Mohd. Bafati Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Somendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anadi Krishna Narayana,Archana Singh,Pankaj Agrawal,Rajendra Singh
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard Sri Somendra Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pankaj Kumar Rai, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no.1, Sri Pankaj Agrawal, learned Counsel for respondent no.2, Sri Rajendra Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent no.3 and Ms. Dolly Dwivedi, holding brief of Smt. Archana Singh, learned Counsel for respondent no.4-Bank.
On 17.6.2019, this Court has passed the following order :-
"Heard Sri Pankaj Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Petitioner was a Class-IV employee in the Nagar Panchayat, Jhushi. He retired from service in June, 2017. A sum of Rs. 4,84,704/- was due and payable to him towards his post retiral benefits which has been paid by the respondent no. 2 by Cheque No. 306050 dated 15.02.2019 which the petitioner deposited in his saving bank account no. 107610000351 of Bank of Baroda, Branch Nyay Nagar Allahabad. However, by the impugned letter dated 23.05.2019, the bank has stopped operation of his bank account and required to deposit the amount withdrawn by him.
Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2, Nagar Panchayat, submits that there is no dispute that the aforesaid amount was due and payable to the petitioner on account of his post retiral benefits. A letter was written by the respondent no. 2 to Dena Bank for reasons that someone in the office of the respondent no. 2 has posed the signature of the Chairman Nagar Panchayat while issuing the aforesaid cheque. He submits that the respondent no. 3 is ready to issue a fresh cheque of the whole amount or after adjusting the amount withdrawn by the petitioner from his saving bank account out of the amount of the aforesaid cheque provided the petitioner returns either the whole or remaining amount to the Zila Panchayat by cheque.
Put up this matter on 20th June, 2019 so as to enable the learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 to obtain complete instructions."
Today, Sri Pankaj Agrawal, learned Counsel for respondent no.2 states that the respondent no.3, Executive Officer of the Nagar Panchayat has not prepared the cheque, the Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat is present in the Court. She has given an explanation as to why she could not prepare the cheque, the explanation although not satisfactory, is accepted.
However, there is no dispute between the parties i.e. sum of Rs.4,84,704/- was due and payable to the petitioner towards his post retiral benefits which has been paid to him by the Cheque No.306050 dated 15.2.2019 and was deposited by the petitioner in his saving bank account with Bank of Baroda Branch, Nyaya Nagar, therefore, without entering into the controversy of legality or any illegality committed in issuance of aforesaid cheque, we find appropriate to direct the respondent no.4-Bank to allow the operation of his bank account by the petitioner. There apprised to some dispute between the Chairperson and the Executive Officer of Nagar Panchayat in question and for that reason the petitioner cannot be allowed to suffer.
For all the reasons aforesaid, we disposed of this writ petition directing the respondent no.4, Bank to allow the petitioner to operate his saving bank account.
The petitioner has unnecessarily been compelled by the respondents to file the writ petition. Therefore, we disposed of this writ petition with the aforesaid direction with cost of Rs.10,000/- which shall be paid by the respondent no.3 to the petitioner within four weeks.
It is made clear that we are not entering into the question of any illegality in issuance of the cheque, therefore, if any proceeding is pending before any authority or any investigation is going on, that shall not be affected by our judgment.
Order Date :- 20.6.2019 S. Singh