Harrassment by public sector bank at resignation

Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 14 December 2011 This query is : Resolved
Request for suitable advice to take legal recourse in following summarized situation

Resigned from Public sector bank hq at Delhi whilst posted at Delhi, in order to get relieved from BANK’s services after selection as Gr. ‘A’ official in a Central University, applied through proper channel, the BANK’s Authorities compelled to deposit BOND amount ( Although there was not any BOND executed nor any Specific training expenditure incurred) of Rs. 5,00,000.00 ( That was deposited UNDER PROTEST to join new job in specified time) in gross violation of BANK Guidelines, Fundamental Rights of Indian constitution, Natural law of justice, Various Acts and judgments of Honorable courts, Central Government guidelines or DPE Guidelines (Department of Public Enterprises guidelines:CHAPTER II PERSONNEL POLICIES(c) Service Matters 29.DPE/Guidelines/II(c)/29 Regarding Enforcement/transfer of bond in respect of employees of Public Enterprises/Undertaking who leave the services of one Undertaking to join another Undertaking/Government service; even without incurring any expenditure on providing any Technical or Scientific Training / existence of Legitimate BOND. Only for the sake of protecting themselves for not having performed their duties or covering their acts depicting dereliction of duties as per guidelines and their latent desire to function as the Supreme authority of the Bank.

To exert extra pressure to disallow acceptance of resignation in absence of deposit of Rs 5 Lac, Salary was stopped from disbursement, Sanctioned Leaves were rejected, Notices were slapped for disciplinary action by incompetent authority, in addition to several threats of spoiling career by imposing false allegations etc. whose sufficient documentary evidences are available. Further, following payments were stopped from payment on false grounds even when the matter was taken up with higher authorities of BANK including C&MD. Following are still pending even after passage of more than 10 months of resignation, and BANK has stopped responding letters:

1. 2 TA bills: For Rs 21518.00 & For Rs. 42500.00.
2. Reimbursement of Fee & incentive for notified education course for Rs 15000.00.
3. Rs. 5,00,000.00 deposited with BANK UNDER PROTEST
4. Terminal Dues : Actual in Lacs, if calculated, such as
a. BANK’s contributions to PF with Interest.
b. SERVICE Gratuity (Service gratuity is in lieu of pension. Minimum service to earn pension is 10 years. The Govt. servant with less than 10 years qualifying service is entitled to service gratuity.)
c. PENSION, In lieu of b above (As either b or c should necessarily be paid.)
d. RETIREMENT Gratuity (A govt. servant who has completed five years qualifying service and has become eligible for service gratuity or pension is entitled to retirement gratuity)

n.b. :
1. All the above are backed by sufficient documentary evidence in the form of letters issued by BANK, RTI responses, documents, electronic proofs.
2. The sufferer is currently residing at Bhopal (MP) basically from Patna (Bihar).

Further,

I did raise protest in writing under acknowledgment and demanded copy of the bond and did move RTI application, demanding copy of the bond, but to no avail and 2 RTI requests are under CIC considerations in Second appeal as the BANK has preferred to stick to delaying tactics. After resignation in feb’11, I have constantly been trying to take recourse from everybody, including GM & CMD of the BANK but they have now stopped to respond even. If 2-3 times, they have responded, its only when I wrote to Finance Ministry, DoPT, Deptt. Of public grievances etc. but that have been only routine erroneous response made so casually that now it seems they are not govt. officials at all. At times, in return, they have tried to continue with their threatening skills like efforts to malign my image in the new job. Even Union people have not been supportive to an outgoing official at all. The only fault is that I could not approach some experienced and competent lawyer/law firm as I was running short of deadline of joining new job and was not in a position to get back my resignation from BANK, as I had not anticipated this raw treatment from BANK where I served for 7 years. BANK had demanded the payment citing the bond, in writing. I did demand the copy of the bond in writing but BANK has been avoiding by hook or crook even when demanded through RTI. I kept requesting them to not insist for deposit of Rs 5 Lac as there was not any such BOND, and even BANK had accepted my resignation letter with clause that there was not any BOND as on date, with seal. And ultimately when BANK did not relent, given the fear of not being able to join new job by given time, I ultimately deposited the payment under protest. BANK has issued receipt mentioned the payment is received against bond but finally issued a letter after deposit that there is no provision of depost of BOND amount UNDER PROTEST. The summarized matter of the fact is that BANK had selected a few experienced employees to impart specialized training but a few officers, who were responsible for arranging such training, despite instructions, kept avoiding and did not organize the training because of their biases, that could have cost some amount to BANK. By that time, my outside employment came and I tendered my resignation which the senior manager(establishment ) accepted with her seal as she knew from records that there was no such BOND. Now, the officers feared that BANK will not leave them, as they on their own had defied the orders of arranging training and execute a BOND as per guidelines, they kept forwarding my resignation letter to competent authority with insistence of recovery of BOND though my resignation letter had the facts to the contrary, while at the same time they kept threatening me and exerting pressures resorting to all sort of tactics as stated already, just with the notion that if they recover the amount, they will not immediately face the music. They, going by my simple nature, thought that I would not be taking legal recourse, and if I took, that will take long years and by that time they will retire from the job. I know that I have sufficient documentary evidence and now I wish to not only get my dues back but at the same time, some hefty penalty on erring and lying officers be imposed and be paid to me as compensation. Though summarized version, but still I think, this will serve the purpose for further guidance.

1. Should i, being a government official, pursue the case in my own name or through my wife who is not working?
2. can i sue the BANK for Dues only or to teach them a lesson, i shouls claim for damages/ compensation as well?
3. How much will this cost as this act of BANK has left me financial devastated?
4. Is there some law of limitation as i depositted the amount in Feb'11 UNDER PROTEST and have continously been taking up the matter with BANK?
5. can I sue the BANK from Bhopal or delhi only?

Regards.

Follow Query

Report Abuse

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 15 December 2011
1. It shall be better to persue the case in the name of your wife.

2. You should fight on all fronts.

3. You can obtain the service of legal service authority and even charges can be negotiated.

4. Your litigation is within limitation.

5. Both places.

prabhakar singh (Expert) 18 December 2011
It appears I have attended this query in forum section on a reminder of one of my friend as generally I do not attend forum section.

There also Mr. Makkad has been prompt to attend your query and I appreciate that.

We both have suggested you to choose remedy via writ since it is confirmed here that it is a case of nationalized bank,writ will prove to be the best remedy.

In Dwarka Nath vs. ITO AIR 1966 SC 81(vide paragraph 4)speaking about powers of High Courts under article 226 the Apex court Court observed :
"This article is couched in comprehensive phraseology and it ex facie confers a wide power on the High Courts to reach injustice wherever it is found. The Constitution designedly used a wide language in describing the nature of the power, the purpose for which and the person or authority against whom it can be exercised. It can issue writs in the nature of prerogative writs as understood in England; but the scope of those writs also is widened by the use of the expression "nature", for the said expression does not equate the writs that can be issued in India with those in England, but only draws an analogy from them."

The above decision has been followed by the Apex Court in Shri Anadi Mukta Sadguru vs. V. R. Rudani AIR 1989 SC 1607 (para 18).

In a very recent judgement the Apex Court approved these two judgments and observed that "No doubt, the ordinary practice in our High Courts since the time of framing of the Constitution in 1950 is that petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution pray for a writ of the kind referred to in the provision. However, from the very language of the Article 226, and as explained by the above decisions, a petition can also be made to the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for an order or direction, and not for any writ. "[Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug vs Union Of India & Ors. decided on7March2011http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/235821/]

1].As regards to answer your Q1,I think cause of action has accrued to you and not to your wife then you should be the petitioner and you wife can do the general parvi of the case.

2].Since suit shall attract deposit of court fees and would be time consuming job causing irritation and frustration and as already cited,the High Court has ample powers to twist remedies as justice require in a case,I am suggesting WRIT,because it shall curtail at least 20 years of time length of your suit litigation and the journey would be only two tier,High court thereafter Supreme court,and three tire.

3].A writ would not cost like suits as only
a fixed court fees that is very nominal would be payable.In suits as it is all money matter and court fees would be payable advolerum depending upon Delhi court fees Act it may go up to any where about 8% + or -.

4].The limitation for suit is 03 years from the date you were forced to pay in name of a fake bond.

5].In my opinion there is no jurisdiction vested in your matter in Bhopal Courts or in MP High court as all has gone in Delhi,then jurisdiction is in DELHI.Only because now you are in Bhopal,no jurisdiction for the causes can be presumed to have arose in Bhopal.It might be an other analogy if the particular PSU also has its office in Bhopal,but to go safe and keep away from technicalities of law Delhi has clean jurisdiction.

Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 20 December 2011
Should i seek guidance as regards Q. no 1 afresh as there have been differences of opinions? Specially if Makkad saheb emlightens further on it.

Guest (Expert) 20 December 2011
Of course the query is repeated one, which has already been replied earlier elsewhere also. Probably, either the author of the question was not satisfied with the answers or is desirous of having opinion of several other experts also for his satisfaction.