THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NISAR AHMAD KAKRU AND THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO.691 OF 2010 28th September, 2010. Between: B.GOPALAKRISHNA .. APPELLANT AND MANJEERA GRAMEENA BANK JOGIPET, MEDAK DISTRICT @ SANGAREDDY REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND ANOTHER .. RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NISAR AHMAD KAKRU AND THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO.691 OF 2010 O R D E R: (PER THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NISAR AHMAD KAKRU) Harassment of the wife because of non-fulfillment of demand for dowry resulted in institution of a criminal case under section 498-A IPC against the appellant, which clinched in his conviction. Conviction was maintained in the appeal. However, in revision it witnessed alteration on the basis of compromise between the couple. Consequently, a demand for reinstatement by the appellant but same was declined by his employer-respondent vide his communication dated 5.10.2005 which was questioned by medium of writ petition. Alongside a miscellaneous petition was filed which begot an ad- interim relief of reinstatement in favour of the petitioner, resultantly he was reinstated on 3.11.2005, ex-facie in compliance with the direction of the court. During the currency of the writ petition respondents did not choose to oppose the reinstatement of the petitioner. That being the stance the writ court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner’s claim for consequential benefits on the touchstone of Manjeera Grameena Bank Staff Regulations, 1983. The order is questioned because of denial of a writ to treat the appellant in service for the purposes of consequential benefits. But the impediment for the petitioner is that he was out of service because of the legal infirmity suffered by him by his conviction. Situated thus interference is declined. At this stage, the learned counsel restricted his claim to the benefit that accrues to him from the date of his reinstatement. In that view of the matter, we leave the respondents free to consider the same on the touchstone of the Rules/Regulations governing the field as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of three months to be reckoned from the date of copy of this order is served upon the competent authority. Disposed of. (VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR,J) (NISAR AHMAD KAKRU, CJ) 28th September, 2010. Nagesh babu THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NISAR AHMAD KAKRU AND THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO.691 OF 2010 O R D E R: (PER THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NISAR AHMAD KAKRU) 28th September, 2010.