Bibha Sinha v. The Central Bank Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7243 of 2016 ====================================================== Bibha Sinha wife of Late Sunil Kumar Rukhaiyar resident of Mohalla Ashok Nagar, Road No. 1/D, Kankarbagh, P.S. Kankarbagh, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Central Bank of India through its Chairman, Mumbai. 2.

The Chairman, Central Bank of India, Mumbai 3.

The Managing Director, Central Bank of India, Mumbai. 4.

The Executive Director, Central Bank of India, Mumbai. 5.

The Chief General Manager, Central Bank of India, Central Office, Mumbai. 6.

The Zonal Manager, Central Bank of India, Block B, 2nd Floor, Maurya Lok Complex, New Dak Bunglow Road, Patna.

7.

The Chief Manager HRD Central Bank of India, Rameshwar Sinha Path, Bisar Talab, Gaya.

8.

The Deputy General Manager, HRD, Central Bank of India, Gaya. 9.

The Manager HRD, Central Bank of India, Regional Office, Gaya. 10.

The Branch Manager, Sasaram Branch, Sasaram, Central Bank of India. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anjani Kumar Sinha, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Sinha, Sr. Adv.

Mr.Ajit Kumar Sinha, Adv.

Ms.Minu Kumari, Adv.

Ms.Dilkash Khan, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 12-10-2023

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- "1.i) To issue a writ of Mandamus commanding upon the respondents to make payment of interest over the delayed payment to the petitioner admissible to her on account of medical reimbursement and death cum retiral benefit of her husband at the rate of interest charged from her by

Patna High Court CWJC No.7243 of 2016(2) dt.12-10-2023 2/2 the respondent on account of education loan taken by her late husband as the respondent Bank continued charging interest over the education loan and refuse to waive the interest over it even after repeated request made by the petitioner, due to death of her husband but on their part made delay in the payment of medical reimbursement and death cum retiral benefit."

2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks not to press the present writ petition, however, seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to avail such other alternative remedies as are otherwise available under the law, for redressal of her aforesaid grievances. Liberty so sought is granted.

3. The writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) sonal/- U