Md. Arshad v. Indian Bank
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2915 of 2025 ====================================================== Md. Arshad Son of Nehal Ahmad, Resident of Choudhary Hotel Lane Samanpura, P.S.-, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
Indian Bank through Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, having its Corporate Office 254-260, Avvai Shanmugam Salai, Royapettah, Chennai- 600 014.
2.
The Executive Director-cum-Appellate Authority, Indian Bank, Corporate Office Vigilance Department, Post Box No. 5555, 254, 260, Avvai, Shammugam Salai, Royapeth, Chennai- 600001 3.
The General Manager (HRM), Indian Bank having its corporate Office 254260, Avvai Shanmugam Salai, Royapettah, Chennai- 600 014. 4.
The Deputy General Manager cum Appellate Authority, Indian Bank, having its Corporate Office 254-260, Avvai Shanmugam Salai, Royapettah, Chennai- 600 014.
5.
The Chief Manager (HRM), Indian Bank having its corporate Office 254260, Avvai Shanmugam Salai, Royapettah, Chennai- 600 014 6.
The Assistant General Manager/Deputy Zonal Manager and Disciplinary Authority, Indian Bank, Zonal Office, Patna, 1st Floor, Budh Marg, Patna-1. 7.
The Chief Manager and Inquiry Authority, Indian Bank, Admin. Department, Zonal Office, Patna, 1st Floor, Budh Marg, Patna-1 ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Prince Kumar Mishra, Adv.
For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Rajan Ghoshrave, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL ORAL ORDER 20-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent-State.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the punishment order dated 30.04.2024 (Annexure 'P/1') has been passed against the petitioner, which has been challenged by him through memo of appeal dated 12.06.2024
Patna High Court CWJC No.2915 of 2025(2) dt.20-02-2025 2/2 (Annexure 'P/2'), till date the appeal is still pending therefore, it is prayed by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petition may be disposed of directing the concerned authority to consider and decide the memo of appeal of the petitioner Annexure 'P/2' and pass a reasoned order within a stipulated period fixed by this Court.
3. The prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is not opposed by learned counsel for the State.
4. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for both the parties, the petition is disposed of directing concerned authority/ respondents to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner which he raised through memo of appeal (Annexure 'P/2') and pass a reasoned order in accordance with relevant rules and laws as early as possible probably within 45 days from the receipt of the copy of this order, if not decided yet.
5. This petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (Arvind Singh Chandel , J) tusharika/- U