MANISHA JAISWAL Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA
LAWS(ALL)-2014-8-474
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on August 06,2014

Manisha Jaiswal Appellant
VERSUS
STATE BANK OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) UNDER an agreement dated 27 December 2010 the petitioner was engaged as a Business Correspondent by the State Bank of India in the Regional Office at Gorakhpur for the extension of the bank's services in the area of Sauraha. The agreement was for 12 months and was terminable by either side with one month's notice. In addition, the Bank reserved its right to terminate the engagement if the performance of the petitioner was found contrary to the bank's instructions or if the petitioner was found performing any action detrimental to the Bank.
(2.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the termination of the agreement and seeks among other reliefs: (i) an injunction to restrain the Bank from interfering? with her activities; (ii) a direction to allow the petitioner to operate the KIOSK banking code; and (iii) a direction to release the commission of the petitioner for the months of January to June 2014 in the amount of Rs.2,18,828/ -.
(3.) THE submission of the petitioner is that the agreement has been terminated and the services have been discontinued without holding an inquiry and serving a charge sheet or statement of allegations on the petitioner. The nature of the engagement of the petitioner did not involve a relationship of employment. The petitioner was purely engaged as a service provider to facilitate the extension of the bank's services in a particular area. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent, in pursuance of the previous order of this Court dated 28 July 2014, has placed on the record the instructions in the form of a compilation of documents. This compilation indicates that an investigation was carried out following which a report was submitted on 6 June 2014. The investigation was ordered by the Deputy General Manager. During the course of investigation, the statements of the petitioner as well as her brother, in their own handwriting, were recorded. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner had opened certain fake accounts and had carried out fake transactions in order to increase the commission payable. The statement of the petitioner dated 28 May 2014 contains a specific admission of liability.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.