Suryadeo Singh v. State Bank Of India Through Sri Arundhati Bhattacharya The Chairman, State Bank Of India And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2033 of 2017 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3893 of 2014 ====================================================== Suryadeo Singh S/o Shankar Mandal At- Sikandarpur, P.O. Benigir, DistrictMunger. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
State Bank Of India through Sri Arundhati Bhattacharya The Chairman, State Bank Of India, State Bank Bhavan, 4th Floor, Nariman Point, Mumbai400021 2.
Sri Arundhati Bhattacharya, The Chairman, State Bank of India, State Bank Bhavan, 4th Floor, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 3.
Sri Ajit Sood, Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, Local Head Office, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna, Pin-800001 4.
Sri Abhijit Dutta General Manager, State Bank of India (Bihar and Jharkhand) Local Head Office, Judges Court Road, Patna-800001 5.
Sri Vinod Kumar Mishra, Deputy General Manager, State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Third Floor Bhowesh Bhawan, Khangerpur, Bhagalpur 6.
Sri Shashi Kumar Panday, Regional Manager (Range- 2), State Bank of India, Regional Business Office, Bhagat Singh Chowk Munger. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dhirendra Nath Jha For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Kaushlendra Kumar Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 25-02-2020 Heard Mr. Dhirendra Nath Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kaushlendra Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the State Bank of India.
The petitioner filed this contempt petition for willfully disobeying and disregarding the order dated 14.08.2014 passed by a writ court in C.W.J.C. No.3893 of 2014.
The writ court in para 13 and 14 passed order which
2/4 reads as under:
"13. This Court, however, would not like to say anything more at this stage but, then, the manner in which Kamal Kishore Prasad and his two sons Shankar Prasad and Manoj Kumar have been given favourable treatment in the award of the contract in the different offices or branches of Munger regional office of State Bank of India should also be enquired into by the competent authority of the State Bank of India at the head office level at Patna under supervision of Chief General Manager of State Bank of India.
14. This Court would also direct the office of Chief General Manager of the State Bank of India at the level of head office to lay down a firm policy with regard to the award of contract for operation of generator for functioning in the branches and ATM of the State Bank of India by introducing one common norm and uniform pattern so that they may be strictly adhered to by the local officers to rule out the possibility of arbitrariness and bungling as has been alleged and partly also found to be correct by this Court while examining the case of the petitioner."
From perusal of order as contained in para 13 and 14 of the order dated 14.08.2014, it appears that the court directed the Chief General Manager to enquire as to how Kamal Kishore Prasad and his two sons, Shankar Prasad and Manoj Kumar have been given favourable treatment in the award of the contract in the different offices or branches of Munger regional office of State Bank of India and this Court further directed the
3/4 Chief General Manager, State Bank of India at the level of head office to lay down a firm policy with regard to the award of contract for operation of generator for functioning in the branches and ATM of the State Bank of India by introducing one common norm and uniform pattern so that they may be strictly adhered to by the local officers to rule out the possibility of arbitrariness and bungling as has been alleged and partly also found to be correct by this Court while examining the case of the petitioner.
From perusal of para 6 and 7 of the show cause, it appears that General Manager enquired into the matter through Dy. General Manager, Bhagalpur and the Dy. General Manager, Bhagalpur submitted report finding that the subsequent contract was awarded without any favour to any contractor. It is further stated that the State Bank of India has already issued uniform circular containing uniform conditions for award of contract to supply electricity through generator but Mr. D.N.Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that again Kamal Kishore Prasad and his two sons have been awarded the contract but once a circular containing uniform conditions for award of contract is issued, the subsequent award of contract to anybody cannot be the subject matter for consideration in this contempt
4/4 petition. I find that in sum and substance, the directions of this Court has already been complied with and, therefore, no further action is required.
Accordingly, this contempt petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner that if the petitioner finds that the subsequent contract is also awarded to any person without following the conditions contained in the circular, the petitioner may file writ petition.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U