- (1.) BY this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the letter dated September 7, 1999 being Annexure 'N' whereby acceptance of offer of voluntary retirement has been withdrawn.
(2.) UNDISPUTED fact of this case is as follows: The petitioner was employed by the respondent Bank on compassionate ground In the post of clerk owing to death of her husband. She served the bank for more than 20 years, and that is why under the service regulation she applied for voluntary retirement to the bank which in its turn however had accepted on certain conditions which amongst others is for liquidation of the outstanding dues. In course of her employment her son, viz., one Debashis Endow being the respondent No. 8 as then being unemployed obtained Transport Loan on certain terms and conditions. The petitioner became guarantor of the aforesaid loan granted in favour of her son. The term loan was duly disbursed and the respondent No. 8 purchased a vehicle being one of the securities of term loan. The aforesaid vehicle however was purchased after having received margin money to the extent of 20% from the Government of West Bengal under the Additional Employment Scheme and which was duly vetted by the respondent bank. The writ petitioner while becoming guarantor, duly deposited her Life Insurance Policies as collateral security for the aforesaid loan. The writ petitioner's son after having obtained employment duly applied to the bank for transfer of the aforesaid loan in favour of the respondent No. 6. After due negotiation the respondent bank agreed to accept the proposal for transfer of the aforesaid liability of loan in favour of the respondent No. 6. It appears ultimately the respondent bank from its regional office agreed to transfer the said transport loan in favour of the respondent No. 6 on the following terms and conditions: (i) Respondent No. 6 has to accept the entire outstanding dues as on the date of transfer (then debit balance was Rs. 2,47,906.35 as on January 8, 1990). (ii) The rate of interest will be as per norms. (iii) Respondent No. 6 is to mortgage a house property at Darbhanga the valuation of which is not less than Rs. 5 lacs. (iv) The loan is to be repaid by 60 monthly instalments. (v) Before transferring the loan account in the name of the respondent No. 6 he is to produce non -encumbrance -cum -Marketability Certificate and Valuation Report from the Bank's approved lawyer and valuer at Darbhanga. It appears that the aforesaid proposal was accepted by the respondent No. 6. It also appears. from the documents that the respondent No. 6 in terms of the aforesaid agreement while taking liability of the aforesaid loan account duly executed Demand Promissory Note, Letter of Lien, Hypothecation of Transport Equipment and Hypothecation of debts and movable assets. It appears further that in addition to the above he signed a memorandum for deposit of title deeds. It further appears that the said loan account which was originally maintained by United Bank of India in its Dalhousie Square Branch was sought to be transferred to Darbhanga Branch. The vehicle was handed over by the respondent No. 8 to the respondent No. 6 and the respondent No. 8 also refunded the margin money along with interest to the Government of West Bengal.
(3.) NOW the fact in dispute is whether the aforesaid loan account has been transferred finally in favour of the respondent No. 6 or not and for that matter whether the liabilities of the writ petitioner and the respondent No. 8 stand discharged or not because of the aforesaid arrangement and/or agreement. In other words, whether the acceptance of proposal for voluntary retirement can be withdrawn on the plea of non -discharge of liability or not.;