Rajendra Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4483 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3467 of 2012 ====================================================== 1.

Rajendra Singh Son of Late Sheo Govind Singh Resident of Village-Chapra, P.O.-Akohi, P.S.-Akorhi Gola, District-Rohtas. 2.

Mahesh Prasad Son of Shri Bajo Prasad Resident of Village-Kakaila, P.O.- Mirchaiganj, P.S.-Nalanda, District-Nalanda.

3.

Kamal Mohan Prasad Son of Late Parmeshwar Prasad Resident of Flat No.407.Prince Apartment, Magistrate Colony, P.O.-Ashiana Nagar, P.S.- Rajiv Nagar, District-Patna 4.

Udai Kant Tiwari Son of Late Basant Kumar Tiwari, Resident of Flat No.103, Shiva Enclave, Ved Nagar, Rukunpura, Bailey Road, P.S.- Rukunpura, District-Patna.

5.

Dinesh Chandra, Son of ZLate Kesho Sah, Resident of Mohalla-Ashanagar, P.O. and P.S.-Sohsarai, District-Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Through the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna. 2.

Shri Pranay KUmari Mohanty, Chairman, Madhya BIhar Gramin Bank, Patna.

3.

Shri Nithikant Nayak, General Manager, Madhya BIhar Gramin Bank, Patna.

4.

Shri Ravikant Shrivastava, Senior Manager, Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank, Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhinav Srivastava, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Rastogi, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 06-07-2023 Heard the parties.

The present petition has been preferred for compliance of the order dated 19.12.2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3467 of 2012 by which the respondents-opposite parties were directed to see the case of the petitioners for promotion.

Patna High Court MJC No.4483 of 2018(8) dt.06-07-2023 2/2 A show cause has been filed on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 to 5 annexing an order dated 27.9.2022 passed by the General Manager, Dakshin Gramin Bank by which vide a reasoned order, the promotion date of the petitioners have been notionally shifted.

However, the petitioners seem to be still aggrieved and want to challenge the same in the writ petition. So far as the contempt matter is concerned, the order stands complied and as such the MJC No. 4483 of 2018 is disposed of.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U