- (1.) CHALLENGING the interim order dated 1st August, 2003 passed in writ application no. 11117 (W) of 2003 whereby and whereunder learned trial Judge restrained the respondents from proceeding further with the disciplinary proceeding without supplying the writ petitioner the copies of the documents as prayed for, this appeal was preferred by State Bank of India and Ors. The interim order against which this appeal arose reads such: "let affidavit-in-opposition be filed by four weeks reply thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter and the matter will appear eight weeks hence under the heading Hearing. The respondent authorities are directed to release the subsistence allowance of the petitioner month by month in accordance with law. There will be a further interim order restraining the respondents from proceeding with the disciplinary proceeding without allowing the petitioner the copies of the documents as prayed for by the petitioner. The proceeding may continue after giving copies of the documents as directed above and the authorities are restrained from passing any final order in respect of the disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner until further orders. Let the Supplementary affidavit and the affidavit of service be kept with the record and the Supplementary Affidavit be treated as part of the writ petition. Urgent xerox certified copy of the order, if applied for, same be supplied expeditiously. "
(2.) BY the order dated 26th August, 2004, the Division Bench (Coram: hon'ble Justice Altamas Kabir (as His Lordship then was) and Hon'ble Justice asit Kumar Bisi (as His Lordship then was)) directed the appellant-bank to pay the subsistence allowance and on consent of the parties passed a direction for hearing of the writ application along with the appeal, by considering the application for recalling of order dated 17th May, 2004 as filed in the appeal. The order dated 26th August, 2004, reads such: "this application has been made in the appeal for recalling and/or modification of the order passed by us on 17th May, 2004 whereby we had, inter alia, directed the appellant Bank, pending hearing of the stay application, to pay to the writ petitioner/respondent his subsistence allowance, which is said to be due and payable since 17th July, 2002. We had directed that for the present payment of such subsistence allowance was to be made from July, 2002 along with the current dues. Since this application has been made for verification and/or recalling the said order, admittedly such payments have not been made. Appearing in support of the said application, Mr. Joydeep Kar, learned Advocate, submitted that in the writ petition itself, the writ petitioner had prayed for subsistence allowance only from the month of October, 2002 and hence, the writ petitioner could not be given the benefit of payment of such allowance from a prior date. Mr. Kar's submission, in this regard, is not acceptable to us on account of the fact that the learned Single Judge had by his order dated 17th July, 2002 in W. P. No. 18255 (W) of 99 directed that the petitioner would be under deemed suspension, which automatically would entitle him to payment of subsistence allowance. We had, accordingly, directed payment of subsistence allowance from the month of July 2002 and the prayer, as made in the writ petition, relates to the other directions given by the learned Single Judge that in the event the disciplinary proceeding was not completed within the stipulated period, the petitioner would be automatically entitled to subsistence allowance at the rate of 50% of the last pay drawn by him, from the date of expiry of the period till the proceeding was concluded. Prayer (c) of the writ petition relates to the subsequent direction given by the learned Single Judge. We are, accordingly, disinclined to modify and/or recall our order of 17th May, 2004 to the said extent and the appellant-Bank is directed to comply with the said order regarding payment of subsistence allowance from the month of July, 2002, within an extended period of two weeks from date. The other portion of Mr. Kar's submission regarding supply of the documents, as prayed for by the writ petitioner, will be considered at the time of hearing of the appeal. On consent of the parties, let the writ application itself be taken up for hearing along with the appeal and the stay application on the next date. Let the contempt application stand over for consideration for a period of three weeks for the present. Let these matters be taken up for consideration next Tuesday (31. 08. 04 ). Having regard to the nature of the order passed, let a xerox plain copy of this order, duly counter signed by the Assistant Registrar (Court), be made available to the learned advocates for both the parties, on their usual undertakings. "
(3.) IN pursuance thereof, parties filed their respective affidavits of the writ application and stay application. Paper Books filed annexing all papers.;