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

2020 Supreme(J&K) 570

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Ali Mohammad Magrey, J.
(Through Video Link)
Parvez Ahmad Nengroo
Versus
Union Territory of J&K and Ors.
WP(C) No.470/2020 and CM Nos.978/2020 & 1960/2020
Decided on 11.11.2020

Advocates:
Appearing Counsel:
For the Petitioner(s):Mr. Shariq J. Reyaz, Advocate (Through video link)
For the Respondent(s) No.1:Mr. D.C. Raina, Advocate General with Mr. B.A. Dar, Sr. AAG and Mr. Sajad Ashraf Mir, GA
For the Respondent(s) Nos.2 and 4:Mr. Sunil Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ravi Abrol, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) No.3:Mr. R.K. Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nitin Parihaar, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) No.5:Mr. G.A. Lone, Advocate with Mr. Roshan Khayal, Advocate (Through video link)

Contractual disputes, including those arising from the cessation of a Chairman and CEO's tenure in a bank, are not maintainable before the High Court in its writ jurisdiction, as they fall within the realm of private law and are enforceable through ordinary contractual remedies such as damages, injunction, specific performance, and declaration.

Headnote:

BANKING - SERVICE - CHAIRMAN AND CEO - CESSATION - WRIT - MAINTAINABILITY - CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP - SERVICE CONDITIONS - PENSION REGULATIONS - RETIREMENT - COMPENSATION POLICY - RBI APPROVAL - PUBLIC DUTY - MANDAMUS - CIVIL COURT REMEDY.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner, Ex-Chairman of Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited, challenged the communication issued by the Additional Secretary to the Government, Finance Department, conveying the Government's decisions to cease the petitioner as Director on the Board of Directors of the Bank and, consequently, no longer the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the Board of Directors of the Bank. The petitioner also sought reliefs ancillary to the main relief.

Finding of the Court:

1. The petitioner's nomination as Government Director on the Board and his appointment as Chairman-cum-Chief Executive Officer of the Bank was contractual in nature and not governed by any Statute or the service conditions ordinarily applicable to the employees of the Bank. 2. The petitioner is deemed to have retired from the Service of the Bank with effect from 06.10.2016, therefore, his tenure as being the Chairman & CEO of the Bank is not governed by the Service Rules of the Bank. 3. The petitioner's challenge to the communication dated 08.06.2019 and 09.07.2019 is not maintainable before this Court in its extra ordinary writ jurisdiction.

Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner's nomination as Government Director on the Board and his appointment as Chairman-cum-Chief Executive Officer of the Bank was contractual in nature? 2. Whether the petitioner is deemed to have retired from the Service of the Bank with effect from 06.10.2016? 3. Whether the petitioner's challenge to the communication dated 08.06.2019 and 09.07.2019 is maintainable before this Court in its extra ordinary writ jurisdiction?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The petitioner's nomination as Government Director on the Board and his appointment as Chairman-cum-Chief Executive Officer of the Bank was contractual in nature, as evidenced by the fact that he was deemed to have retired from the service of the Bank with effect from the date of his appointment as Chairman & CEO, and that the Compensation Policy of the Bank specifically excludes Chairman and whole time Directors from pension schemes. 2. The petitioner is deemed to have retired from the Service of the Bank with effect from 06.10.2016, as per the definition of 'deemed to have retired' in the Pension Regulations of the Bank, which includes cessation from the services of the Bank on appointment by State / Central Government as a whole-time Director or Managing Director or Chairman in the bank or in any other bank. 3. The petitioner's challenge to the communication dated 08.06.2019 and 09.07.2019 is not maintainable before this Court in its extra ordinary writ jurisdiction, as the dispute is contractual in nature and the petitioner has an alternate remedy of filing a civil suit.

Final Decision: The petition is dismissed in limine alongwith all connected CMs as not maintainable before this Court, leaving the petitioner free to approach the civil court for seeking enforcement of his contractual relationship and/or redressal of his contractual dispute(s) with the Bank.

Judgment

Ali Mohammad Magrey, J.—The petitioner, Ex-Chairman of the Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited, has filed this writ petition, principally, challenging communication no.FD/Bkg/21/2019 dated 08.06.2019 addressed by the Additional Secretary to the Government, Finance Department of the erstwhile State of Jammu & Kashmir, to the Company Secretary, J&K Bank Limited, conveying the decisions of the Government taken by it in exercise of the powers under Article 69(iii) of Articles of Association of the Bank, that the petitioner shall cease to be Director on the Board of Directors of the Bank and, consequently, be no longer the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the Board of Directors of the Bank (the Board), and further about nominating Mr. R. K. Chibber, respondent no.4 herein, as Director on the Board and his appointment as the interim Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the Board/Bank. The petitioner has also sought reliefs ancillary to the aforesaid main relief which would be referred to later in this judgment.

2. The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited (hereinafter, the Bank) is a Public Sector Undertaking Bank, initially incorporated under the Jammu and Kashmir Companies Regulations no.XI of 1920 on 01.10.1938. Clause 1 of the Articles of Association of the Bank states that it is a Government Company within the meaning of Section 2(45) of the Companies Act, 2013 and it is an instrumentality of the State. The Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir is its major shareholder, holding 68.18% of shares in the Bank. In these circumstances, the Bank is under the control of the Government of the Union Territory. The erstwhile State Administrative Council vide its Decision no.148/20/2018 dated 22.11.2018 also decided that the Bank shall apply the provisions of the J&K RTI Act, 2009; that like any other Public Sector Bank, the activities of the Bank shall conform to the CVC Guidelines; and that the Bank shall be accountable to the State Legislature to the extent other PSU Banks at the national level are accountable to the Parliament. It was, however, clarified that for all policy formulation and decision making in the Bank, the Board of Directors of the Bank is the competent authority, and that the business operations of the Bank shall be undertaken and regulated as per the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, Guidelines of RBI, SEBI and other Regulatory authorities. The above decisions of the State Administrative Council were communicated to the Chairman/CEO of the Bank by the Under Secretary to the Government, Finance Department, vide communication no.FD/BKG/2019/13 dated 12.02.2019 to be placed before the Board for implementation.

3. Article 69(i) of the Articles of Association of the Bank under Chapter X with caption ‘Directors’ provides that the number of Directors shall not be more than fifteen or less than seven, and that not more than three of these shall be appointed by the Jammu and Kashmir Government, who will be called Government Directors; provided that no Director other than a Government Director shall be elected as Chairman of the Board. Clause (iii) of Article 69 further provides that Government Directors will continue in their offices so long as their appointment is not cancelled by the Government. Article 75 under Chapter XIII, captioned ‘Rotation of Directors’ provides that all the Directors shall retire by rotation except Government Directors who will continue in their offices so long their appointment is not cancelled by the Government.

4. The petitioner was initially appointed as Company Secretary of the Bank way back in 1998. In September, 2016, he was functioning as Executive President of the Bank. Since the term of office of the Chairman and CEO of the time was expiring, the Board, on the suggestion of the Commissioner/Secretary to Government, Finance Department, J&K, by Resolution no. 32 passed in its meeting held on 20.09.2016, proposed a panel of three candidates in order of preference for approval by the Reserve Ban

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