IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 7009 of 2011 Decided on: 21st September, 2011. Visheshar lal Snartu. …Petitioner. Versus The H.P. State co-operative Bank Ltd. & others. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Lavneesh Kanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Bhupender Gupta, Senior Advocate with Ms. Charu Gupta, Advocate, for respondents No. 1, 2 and 4. Mr. R.K. Bawa, AG with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. AG for respondents No.3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:- a) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari quashing the order dt 26.7.2011 Annexure P-5 passed by District Magistrate. b) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to release arrears of revised pay scales w.e.f. 1.1.2006 to 11.2.2008, to pay arrears of D.A Installments w.e.f. 1.1.2006 to 11.2.2008 and also to pay him Subsistence allowance for the period of suspension w.e.f. 3.2.2008 to 2.11.2008. c) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing respondent no.2 to decide the case of termination of 2 petitioner in the light of decision taken in the case of Sh. Mohan Singh Negi and Sh. Y.S. Negi.” 2. So far as prayers ‘b’ and ‘c’ are concerned, the petitioner has a statutory remedy before the Registrar Co- operative Societies. So far as prayer ‘a’ is concerned, the petitioner has a statutory remedy before the DRT. It is seen that pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the petitioner has already remitted an amount of rupees eight lacs. Petitioner prays some time to invoke the remedy as above. Though the prayer is seriously opposed by the learned Senior Counsel, having regard to the fact that an amount of rupees eight lacs has already been paid and in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that reasonable time is to be granted to the petitioner to invoke remedies, as above. 3. The writ petition is disposed of making it clear that the impugned proceedings shall be deferred for a further period of six weeks from today, so as to enable the petitioner to invoke statutory remedies. The pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 21st September, 2011. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), (kck) Judge. 3