IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7815 of 2011 Kapil Deo Singh, s/o- Chandra Kishore Singh, r/o- village Ranipatti, P.S.- Rajepur, District- East Champaran, at present posted as Branch Manager, Land Development Bank, Branch-Pupri, District- Samastipur. ……….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Co-operative Department, New Secretariat, Patna-1. 2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank, Budha Marg, Patna-1. ………… Respondents with CWJC No.8245 of 2011 Raj Kishore Singh, s/o- Sri Ram Ekbal Singh, r/o- village Abhirajpur, P.S.- Baria, District- Sitamarhi, at present posted as Anusewak, Land Development Bank, Branch- Sitamarhi ……….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Co-operative Department, New Secretariat, Patna-1. 2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank, Budha Marg, Patna-1. …….. Respondents with CWJC No.7823 of 2011 Chandra Kishore Singh, s/o- Late Ram Fal Singh, r/o- village Ranipatti, P.S.- Rajepur, District- East Champaran, at present posted as Anusewak, Land Development Bank, Branch-Pupri, District- Sitamarhi. …….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Co-operative Department, New Secretariat, Patna-1. 2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank, Budha Marg, Patna-1. …… Respondents. with CWJC No.7848 of 2011 Shatrughan Singh, s/o- Late Ramadhar Singh, r/o- village Chaitha, P.S.- Chaitha, District- East Champaran. At present posted as Branch Manager, Land Development Bank, Branch- Rigga, District- Sitamarhi. ………….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Co-operative Department, New Secretariat, Patna-1. 2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank, Budha Marg, Patna-1. ……………. Respondents. 2 with CWJC No.7862 of 2011 Satyendra Narayan Singh, s/o- Bindeshwari Prasad Singh, r/o- village Sonakhan, P.S.- Mathurapur, District- Sitamarhi. At present posted as Branch Manager, Land Development Bank, Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi. ………… Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Co-operative Department, New Secretariat, Patna-1. 2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank, Budha Marg, Patna-1. …….. Respondents with CWJC No.7916 of 2011 Hari Narayan Singh, s/o- Bindeshwari Prasad Singh, r/o- Singhwahini, P.S.- Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi, at present posted as Field Officer, Land Development Bank, Branch- Rigga, District- Sitamarhi. ……… Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Co-operative Department, New Secretariat, Patna-1. 2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank, Budha Marg, Patna-1. ………. Respondents with CWJC No.7920 of 2011 Sri Naratyan Singh, s/o- Bindeshwari Prasad Singh, r/o- Singhwatimri, P.S.- Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi, at present posted as Cashier, Land Development Bank, Branch- Sitamarhi. ……. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Co-operative Department, New Secretariat, Patna-1. 2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank, Budha Marg, Patna-1. …….. Respondents For the petitioners(in all) : Mr. Rajesh Prasad Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gautam Kumar Yadav, A.C. to S.C. 3. For the State(C.W.J.C. No. 7920/2011): Mr. Dhurendra Kumar, A.C. to S.C. 16 For the State(C.W.J.C. No. 8245/2011): Mr. Hansa Jha, A.C. to S.C. 17. ----------- 3 21.07.2011 These seven writ petitions have been filed by employees of Bihar State Cooperative Land Development Bank (for short “the Bank”) seeking direction upon the respondent 3 Bank to pay them salary for diverse periods. Some of the petitioners claimed themselves to be Branch Manager of different branches of the Bank while some of the petitioners are Field Officers and Peon. Common grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents have defaulted in making payment of their salary for the periods indicated in the application(s). The respondent Bank , therefore, be directed to pay them salary. Counter affidavits have been filed in all these matters. The stand of the respondent Bank can be seen from averments made in paragraph Nos. 3, 4 and 5 of the counter affidavit wherein it has been stated that the Bank resolved by different orders/resolution(s) that payments to the employees would be made from part of the recoveries of loan to be effected by the concerned branches. A well defined mechanism was adopted by different orders/resolutions of the Bank as contained in Annexure-A, A/1, A/2 and A/3 of the counter affidavits. It appears from the pleadings on record that the sustainability of the aforesaid orders/decision passed/taken by the Bank has not been challenged. It is the stand of the Bank that such issue was raised in C.W.J.C. No. 4956 of 2011 when this Court on a consideration of the entire materials on record passed order relevant part whereof are extracted hereinbelow “It is submitted by learned counsel for the Land Development Bank that similar situation obtained for the respondent Bank and it is further submitted that payment of the field employees like the petitioner is based upon the recoveries of loan and the respondent Bank does not have funds otherwise to make the 4 said payment. It is the stand of the Bank that on account of low recovery the Bank is unable to make payment of full salary of the employees. It is further submitted that a huge amount of Rs. 300.76 crore is due and payable to the Bank from the State of Bihar under the Loan Waiver Scheme and when the said amount is received the arrears of salary of the employees shall be paid. In the meantime all the employees are being paid on chronological basis as and when the funds become available.“ It appears that in the said order, this Court considered the submissions of the respondent Bank that the payment of the Field employees like the petitioners was linked to the recoveries of the loan by the officer(s) of the Branch because the respondent Bank had no other fund to make the said payment. The Court also appreciated the stand of the respondent Bank that there was no recovery of loan advanced by the Bank which rendered it unable to pay full salary of the employees. The respondents have stated in the counter affidavit as under in paragraph 11 “11. That, it is submitted that due to bad financial condition the Bank has evolved it’s own schemes for making payment of retrial dues as well as the arrears of salaries of the employees. For making payment of retrial dues the Bank has prepared a chronological list of retired employees as per their date of retirement. The said chronological order is being maintained by the Bank. No out of turn payment is being made by the Bank of its own. The arrears of the salary of the employees will be paid on availability of fund. Making payment to an individual employees will create problem for the Bank and the chronological order will be disturbed and there will be every chance of leveling allegation of discrimination. “ 5 It is thus seen that this Court on earlier occasion after having considered the claims and counter claims of the parties permitted the Bank to pay the salary and other post retiral benefits in chronological order considering the particular facts of the case. Learned counsel for the respondent Bank has taken a firm stand that the Bank has already approached the authorities of the respondent State for payment of compensation against waiver of loan and/or ban imposed on recovery of loan and the matter is being pursued. As and when the amount is made available to the Bank, the salary of the employees like the petitioner would be paid, but in chronological order. I have already extracted the stand of the respondent Bank in this regard as contained in paragraph 11. In view of the fact that the stand of the Bank has already got approval of this Court in the case referred to above (Annexure-C), this Court refrains from passing any positive direction upon the respondents to pay salary as prayed for in the present batch of writ petitions. However, this Court observes that the Bank would pursue the matter, no sooner compensation amount/fund is made available to the Bank, the petitioners shall be paid their due salary in accordance with law and the scheme formulated by the Bank. If any fund, in the meanwhile, is received by the Bank, it will be open to the petitioners to approach the 6 respondent Managing Director for payment of their salary. All the writ applications are disposed of. pkj (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)