← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/296/2023disposed

Durga Pathak v. The State Bank Of India

2024-12-13Mr. Justice Mohit Kumar Shah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.296 of 2023 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11857 of 2017 ====================================================== Durga Pathak Son of Late VijayKant Pathak, Resident of 20/162, New Patliputra Colony, P.S.- Patliputra, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Bank of India through its Managing Director, 2.

The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, West Gandhi Maindan, Patna.

3.

The Deputy General Manager, State Bank of India, Bhagalpur. 4.

The Branch Manager, Haati Branch, State Bank of India, Bhagalpur. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Bhatia, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rakesh Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the SBI :

Mr. Alok Kumar Agrawal, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 13-12-2024 As far as compliance of the judgment of this Court dated 17.3.2021, passed in CWJC No. 11857 of 2017, is concerned, the learned counsel for the parties have made conflicting claims regarding the payment of the provident fund amount, inasmuch as while the Ld. Counsel for the opposite parties has taken shelter of Rule 33 of the State Bank of India Employees Provident Fund Rules, the same has been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the same is not applicable.

2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the Bank has withheld the provident fund amount, due and

Patna High Court MJC No.296 of 2023(7) dt.13-12-2024 2/2 outstanding for payment to the petitioner, despite the fact that the Bank has lost the case.

3.

In view of the conflicting claims, it would be proper that the petitioner files a writ petition afresh, for adjudication of the claim in question, for which the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty. Liberty, so sought, is granted. 4.

Accordingly, the present contempt petition stands disposed off.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Ajay/- U