FOR THE FIRST TIME, A BANK CHAIRMAN OF PSB IS MADE TO
APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT AS "ACCUSED"
FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT...
Dear Members,
Finally
Vijaya Bank Chairman, Mr. Upendra Kamat along with his TEAM appears before the
KHC to submit his / Banks intentions to pay Pensions to the Petitioner
Resignees ONLY within 4/6 weeks time.
For
the first time in the banking history, Chairman of the PSB is made to appear
before the court as "Accused " only because
of contempt petition filed by the Resignees.
In
the *enclosed letter submitted in the Court, to understand correctly, reference
of following date & missing link is must:-
1)
KHC Single Judge Allows pension to Resignees on 18/04/2012 by quashing clause 7
of Vijaya Bank Circular date 07/09/2010 disallowing pension to Resignees.
2) Vijaya Bank Appeal dismissed by Division Bench on 30/07/2012.
3) Vijaya Bank files SLP in SC on 20/08/2012 but does not make SINCERE Efforts for listing & admission.
4) On 07/12/2012, Hon.justice Mukhopadhyay & Justice Swatantra Kumar hear argument of Advocate on Record & do not grant leave to the petition as prima-facie do not find merit in the case. Sensing fear of DISMISSAL, advocate on record requests for withdrawal of Petition with liberty to go in REVIEW before HC. NO REQUEST WAS MADE ON 07/12/2012 TO FILE FRESH SLP IF THEY DONOT GET RELIEF IN LOWER COURT. SC disposes SLP as withdrawn to file review.
5) Vijaya Bank resignees files Contempt Petition.
6) On 25/10/2013 KHC dismissed the Review Petition.
7) Resignee Files before Caveat 20/11/2013 in Supreme Court anticipating Move of Vijaya Bank to file SLP.
8) Vijaya Bank files SLP on 20/11/2013 with hope to get it admitted on 21/11/2013 with interim prayer for contempt petition which is scheduled on 22/11/2013.
9) Surprised to see caveat & could not succeed & request KHC to give time & KHC grants time till 06/12/2013.
10) Master mind team of Vijaya Bank serves Notice of Petition to advocate of Respondents (resignees) on 25/11/2013.
11) Case gets listed on 09/12/2013.
12) Mastermind manages to change it to 02/12/2012 by adding it to supplementary list on Friday i.e. 29/11/2013.
13) On 02/12/2013, the matter is listed before Justice Mukhopadhyay & Justice Gauwda at Sr.No.57.
14) Justice Mukhopadhyay was also on Board on 07/12/2012, when earlier dismissed First SLP of Vijaya Bank.
15) Vijaya Bank Senior counsel argues strongly for admission but, senior counsel for respondent (Resignees) Senior Advocate Sushil Kumar Jain
(The one who argued the case of ShilKumar Jain Vs New
India Insurance Company) & stated that
SLP is not maintainable in view of the Decision of Hon justice
Deepak Mishra & Justice Radhakrishnan dated 03/10/2012.
16) Entire scene changed & Vijaya Bank was put to defence. Advocate sought adjournment till January 17, but understanding ill motive ( Corem of Bench get changed in January) of putting the case before New judges, Court grants date for 06/12/2013.
17) Dy. GM of Vijaya Bank ( Mr. S K Hegde ) moves to Delhi & on 5th December 2013 files application wherein on oath states " on 02/12/2012, the counsel for the Respondent , who was on caveat , has pointed out to the Hon'ble Bench that the present SLP filed by the Petitioner is not maintainable, as the law has been settled now that any SLP filed after withdrawing the earlier SLP without seeking permission to file SLP is not maintainable by virtue of the judgement reported in 2012(12) SC 378 titled Vinod Kapoor Vs State of Goa, which was delivered on 03/10/2012.At the time of withdrawing the SLP on 07/10/2012, Petitioner was not aware about the said technicality".
18) Finally Bench Dismissed the SLP on 06/12/2012 by allowing law point open on the issue.
19)There
after Bank Executive at Banglore moves to KHC & gave letter to KHC
as attached.
Here
important point is that Judgement declared by Court become law of land
under Article 141 of the Constitution of India & IGNORANCE OF LAW " as
pleaded by Vijaya Bank Dy.G.M. is not considered by the BENCH & SLP
Dismissed.
I
have basic question always that will be in my mind is " when Vijaya Bank
DGM, qualified Executive, who has at his disposal Team of Lawyer & Legal
Department of the Bank can plead " Ignorance of Law " to get justice
to the Bank & to do injustice to one Mr.K Karriappa , a Peon
respondent in the case on presumption that Class Four employee,
understands the difference between Resignation & Voluntary Retirement &
when IBA admits that Awards staff doesnot have VRS scheme.
May
God Save Vijaya Bank.
Thanks
& Regards
Pathak
R K
*no enclosure reproduced.
(Vijaya Bank source. Received thro' CH Mahadevan)
(Vijaya Bank source. Received thro' CH Mahadevan)