✦ High Court of India · 08 Jul 2025

SRI P v. RAMANA

Case Details High Court of India · 08 Jul 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
08 Jul 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,256 words

punishment from dismissal to that of comp orders passed by the High Court in confirming the orders of dismissal p dt.21 .8.2017 confirmed by the Appellat arbitrary and in violation of Article '14, 1 contrary to the orders passed by th dt.25.1 .2024 consequently declare that the ...RESPONDENTS nstitution of lndia praying that in the therewith, the High Court may be n more in the nature of l/andamus ondent [,4D and CEO, in RA 413:2024 dt.14.2.2024 for modification of the lsory retirement keeping in view of the P.No.740212018 dt.25.1 .2O24 and ssed by the disciplinary authority Authority dt.30.1 '1 .20'l 7 as illegal, and 21of Constitution of lndia and High Court in W.P.No.740212018 petitioner is entitled for modification of the punishment orders from dismissal to th t of compulsory retirement and entitled to receive all pension and retirement benefi all consequential attendant benefits in the i erests of justice s from the date of superannuation with lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit flled in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to issue an interim direction suspending the operation of the orders passed by 1st respondent [v'lanaging Director and Chief Executive Officer, in RA 413-.2024 d1.12.4.2024 and to consider the case of the petitioner afresh for modification of the punrshment from dismissal to that of compulsory retirement based upon the orders of High Court in W.P.No.740212018 dt.25.1.2024 pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P. V. RAMANA Counsel for Respondents: Dr. K. LAKSHMI NARASIMHA SC FOR UBI The Court made the following: ORDER '/ THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N VARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 2232 of 2o24 ORDER: This writ petition is filed see ing the following relief: to issue a Wit, Order o nature of Mandamus cleclan the 1.1 respondent MD and C 12.4.2024 in repcting m! 14.2.2024 for modr.Jlcatlon o disnrissal to that o.f cotnpulso uiew of the orclers passed bg t 7402 of 2()18 clated 25.1.20 orders of dismissal pas.sed bu t dated 21.8.2O17 conJitned bg dated 3O.11.2O17 as tllegal, a of Article 14,16 and 21 of C contrary to the orders passe W.P.No.7402 of 2018 dated declare that the petitioner is e the punishment orders frorn compulsory retirement ond pension and retirement ben superonnuation with aLl benefits in the interests of jus directiott more in the the orders passed bg in RA 413:2024 dated representation dated the punishment from retirement keeping in High Courl in W.P.No 4 antl conJirmin-o the disciplinary authoritg the Appellate Authoitg bitrory and in uiolation nstitutlon of India and by the High Court in 5. 1-2024 cons ecluentlg titled for modifcation of drsmissrzl to that of ntitled to receiue all Jiom the date of nsequential attendortt and to pass...."

2. Heard Sri P.V.Ramana, le ned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Dr. K shmi Narasimha, learned Standing Counsei appearing for e respondents 1 \ .: aglF \". , .:.:.;;' \ - '''-*l-. RRN, J Wp 12232 2021 -

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court challenging his dismissal order, dated 30.ll.2Ol7 passed by respondent No.2 by filing a W.P.No.7402 of 201.8. After hearing both sides, uide order, dated 25.O 1 .2024, tlnrs Hon'ble Court passed the following order: " Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposccl of b1- directing the petitioner Lo make a representatior-r before the respondent authorittcs for modification of the punishment lrom dismissal from service to that of compulsory retirement in terms of Regulation 4(h) of the Andhra Bank Officer Emplolrees' (Dismissal & Appeal) Regulatipns, 1976 within a period of four (04) weel<s from the clate of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of thc same, the respondent bank authorities are directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orclers in accordance with law, within a period of cigl-rt(O8) weeks thereafter".

4. After hearing both sides and observing tl-re mertts of the case, this Court had passed the above order and directed the petitioner to make a fresh representation. Subsequently in compliance r'vith the said order, the petitioner made a I I -) RRN, J Wp 12232 2024 representation belore the a thorities. However, the authorities without properlv und rstanding the order passed by this Court, once again simpl rejected the same on the very sarne aspect. The intention of this Court was that after hearing both sides, considering th lssues involved, the Court has .passed modification of the o to compulsory retirement. Afte ginal order from dismissal hearing the arguments submitted by the counsel for t e respectlve parties, the aforesaid order was passed. Even today, the learned counsel for the respondent again submitte the same arguments

5. In view of the above said sub it appropriate to dispose of this w, issions, this Court deems rt petition by directing the authorities to consider the repre ntation, dated 14.O2.2O24 afresh ald to pass appropriate rders with regard to the modification of the punishment fro dismissal to compulsory retirement along with the conse uential benefits within a period of four (4) u,eeks from the ate of receipt of a copy of this order. I 4 ! ,,r -,al- ',.::. RITN, J Wp 12232 2024

6. With the above direction, this Writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if anr. shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// o.rtW?[8,!t#l'*t \( '. r. sectror.i oFFtcER I The [Vlanaginq Director anri eh.igf fxs6utive Officer Union Bank of lndia. centrat Office. 239. Union aant.qrrivan Vi;h"r,;;E#;r, r,4ars. Nariman t oinl l\4umbai. Ma harashtra_400021 3?r?.:,x;3u:,L,Po["f:"|.i_rJfl.^rpelare Authority. Union Bank of rndia. centrar n, Vid hana Bhdva n t\4arg. N"."; ; i;;i,,, ", rVt umba r, Ma ha rasfrtra-+OOOila Bf"::[1].?giti,'f"n*fl :l ,J:fl ffiJ,{il,I3l,,,t,ffi"?,JE[];yxfi:,?:ffi Qnu 99 to Sri p V Ramana Advocate tOpUCl ffS 33 t""B# Lakshmi ru"'isimir't'st Fdh usrt Advocate topucl i i i I l To, 2 3 4 6 IMBC GJP I I I.: i l i l I HIGH COpRT / t DATED: 0810712025 . a:. .1 ,: /,: l, ro (. C 12 ru6 2[6 \,,. -2, \.. * 'Ylii I \ ORDER WP.No.12232 ot 2024 3 "/t- / /i< DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments