Sunil Kumar v. The Chairman

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1887 of 2022 ====================================================== Sunil Kumar S/o Sudarshan Ray, resident of Village-Aphar, P.S. Amnaur, District-Saran at Chapra.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Chairman Central Bank of India, Chandramukhi Nariman Point, Mumbai.

2.

The Zonal Manager, Central Bank of India, Zonal Office, 2nd Floor, Maurya Lok Complex, Patna-800001.

3.

Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, Naya Bazar, P.S. Siwan, Dist. Siwan.

4.

Branch Manager, Central Bank of India, Aphar Branch, District Saran at Chapra.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dewendra Narayan Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Ajit Kumar Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) (The proceedings of the Court are being conducted by Hon'ble the Chief Justice/Hon'ble Judges through Video Conferencing from their residential offices/residences. Also, the Advocates and the Staffs joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residences/offices.) 11-02-2022 Petitioner has prayed for following relief (s) :- "That the present writ application is being filed on behalf of the petitioner through Public Interest Litigation, for issuance of appropriate Writ Rule or Direction commanding upon the respondent authorities to get stopped the relocation of the branch of the Central Bank of India, from ward No.7 of the village Aphar, situated under the jurisdiction of Amnour Police

Patna High Court CWJC No.1887 of 2022(2) dt.11-02-2022 2/2 Station in the district of Saran where it was opened in the year of 1988 and since then the same is running smoothly continuously being operational and convenient for a mass of people of the locality till date, to any other place." After the mater was heard for some time, finding the Bench not to be in favour of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner, under instructions, states that, in view of the intervening developments, the petition may be permitted to be withdrawn. Prayer allowed.

Petition is disposed of as withdrawn.

Interlocutory application, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( S. Kumar, J) K.C.Jha/chn U