SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Ker) 427

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. ASHA, J.
T.M. DINESH KUMAR AND ORS. - PETITIONERS
Versus
MALABAR CANCER CENTRE SOCIETY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNING BODY, MALABAR CANCER CENTRE, THALASSERY AND ORS. – RESPONDENTS
W.P(C) No.37894 of 2016-J
Decided On : 14-03-2017

Advocates Appeared:
FOR THE PETITIONER: KALEESWARAM RAJ, A. ARUNA
FOR THE RESPONDENTS: N. NANDAKUMARA MENON, P.K. MANOJKUMAR, V. BINOY RAM, SMITHA S. PILLAI, ALICE THOMAS

Headnote:Service - It is not essential that each of the employees would have income account only with the official bank of the employee as far as the drawal of salary finished by a bank account is apprehensive.

JUDGMENT :

1. Eight employees of the Malabar Cancer Centre ('MCC' for short) -the 1st respondent, have filed this writ petition challenging Exts.P3 to P10 letters by which they were requested to open their savings account in IDBI (Industrial Development Bank of India), the official bank of the 1st respondent, for disbursement of salary. By these letters they were also informed that they can retain their existing bank account giving a request to the IDBI bank to transfer their salary to the existing bank account. The petitioners submit that they are not paid their salary since they did not oblige to the request/demand of 1st respondent.

2. The MCC had issued Ext.P12 circular on 3.6.2013 informing that its banking transactions had been shifted to the IDBI, Thalassery and accordingly salary accounts of all the staff need be maintained with the new bank. All permanent staff members were requested to fill up the application form for starting new account and to submit the duly filled forms on or before 12.6.2013. On coming to know about the circular, the staff association of the 1st respondent, of which the petitioners are also members, protested against the same and submitted Ext.P11 mass representation saying that the 1st respondent had taken a unilateral decision without having any discussion with the members of the staff.

3. According to the petitioners, they did neither shift their account to the IDBI bank nor open new account with it. Therefore, their salary was being paid in cash. While so, they received Exts.P3 to P10 letters dated 19.08.2016 from the 3rd respondent asking them to open the account with the IDBI bank immediately. It was stated that the statutory auditors of the 1st respondent had in their interim report for the year 2014-15 raised objections to the effect that few permanent staff members were yet to open their savings account through the official bank (IDBI bank) for salary disbursal. In those circumstances, the administrative officer of the 1st respondent informed the petitioners that in view of the objections raised in the audit, salary can be disbursed only through bank account and not by any other means. The petitioners were therefore requested to start their account immediately after obtaining the application from the Help Desk of IDBI at MCC. They were informed that they will be free to retain their existing bank account and they can request the IDBI bank to transfer their entire salary or the amount they wish to transfer to the existing bank account. The petitioners, while challenging these letters allege that they have not received salary from August, 2016 onwards and they did not get the festival (Onam advance and other) allowances. According to the petitioners, the 1st respondent continues to have their several transactions like payment of tax through SBI, Thalassery itself and therefore, the 1st respondent cannot insist the petitioners to change their bank account to IDBI. According to them it is their right to decide the Bank in which they should open an account. It is also their case that being a public sector bank it is possible for them to avail loans from the SBI. It is also stated that earlier, financial transactions of the 1st respondent were through Corporation Bank, which was later shifted to State Bank of India.

4. Thus the petitioners insist that they should get salary through the existing account with the SBI itself without insisting them to open accounts with the IDBI.

5. The 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit explaining the circumstances under which they had to shift their financial transactions to the IDBI, Thalassery branch, which has opened a counter at MCC itself. The circumstances are explained in paragraphs 6 and 12 of the counter affidavit which read as follows:

"6. It is submitted that in addition to the Treasury Savings Bank Account Malabar Cancer Centre (MCC) was also operating a Savings Bank Account in the State Bank of India, Thalassery Branch. The Institute found that



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top