IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2010 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 5093 of 2010(J) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.SHANAVAS, OFFICER (MARKETING & RECOVERY), RURAL, STATE BANK OF INDIA, KUTTICHIRA BRANCH, CHALAKKUDY. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE GENERAL MANAGER (PERSONAL & HR) DIVISION, STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, S.S.KOIL ROAD, THAMPANNOOR, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (ADMN.), STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, S.S.KOIL ROAD, THAMPANNOOR, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, STATE BANK OF INDIA, CORPORATE CENTRE, MUMBAI-400 021. 4. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, RURAL BUSINESS, STATE BANK OF INDIA, CORPORATE CENTRE, MUMBAI-400 021. ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH, STANDING COUNSEL, SBI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 5093 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT As per Ext.P1 dated 9.4.2008, the petitioner was appointed as an Officer (Marketing and recovery) Rural on contract basis for a period of two years from 7.4.2008 to 6.4.2010 by the first respondent. Ext.P1 appointment is renewable in accordance with the Service Rules governing the service of the employees of the State Bank of India. While so, as per Ext.P2 dated 14.11.2009, alleging unsatisfactory service performance, it was decided to terminate the service of the petitioner by invoking the provision under paragraph 20.2 of the State Bank of India Officers- Marketing and Recovery (Rural) Service and conduct Rules, for brevity hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' only. Feeling aggrieved by Ext.P2, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 appeal. Pending consideration of Ext.P4 appeal, the notice period prescribed under the Rules expired. It is in the said circumstances that the petitioner approached this Court by filing this Writ Petition. W.P.(C) NO.5093/2010 2 2. Admittedly, going by the terms and conditions of the appointment of the petitioner, there is provision for invoking the powers under clause 20.2 for terminating the contractual appointment. At the same time, the said rule provides for an appeal. Necessarily such a provision incorporated in the rules enables an appointee like the petitioner to challenge an order passed by invoking power under clause 20.2 of the Rules. The appellate authority has to appreciate the entire contentions raised by the concerned officer in the appeal including irregularities attributed against the original order. In this case, admittedly, the petitioner has approached the appellate authority by filing Ext.P4 appeal and the same is pending. In the circumstances, without making any observations as to the merits of the rival contentions, I am disposing of this Writ Petition with a direction to the appellate authority among the respondents, to consider Ext.P4 appeal submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.5093/2010 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. W.P.(C). NO. 5093/2010 JUDGMENT 17th March, 2010