Nand Lal Mahto v. The Uco Bank And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9086 of 2016 ====================================================== Nand Lal Mahto, son of late Ram Adin Mahto, resident of Mohalla Ranipur Police Station Khajekala, District Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Uco Bank through its Senior Manager UCO Bank Patliputra Indistrial Area, Alpana Market, Patliputra, Patna

2. The Manager, UCO Bank, Patliputra Industrial Area Alpana Market, Patliputra, Patna

3. The Authorised Officer, UCO Bank, Patliputra Industrial Area, Alpana Market, Patliputra, Patna

4. The Area Zonal Manager, UCO Bank, Circle Office, Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prafull Chandra Jha, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 13-07-2016 Heard Mr. Prafull Chandra Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the Bank.

The grievance of the petitioner is that he is not being supplied with the details of the outstanding as it presently stands against him, despite the order passed by this court in C.W.J.C.No.8966 of 2014 which runs as follows: "............................................................... In view of the nature of grievance of the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Bank with a representation for appropriate redressal. If any such representation before the Senior Manager of the Respondent Bank is filed within a period of two weeks from today, he shall ensure that the details of the calculation of the amount said to be outstanding against the petitioner are supplied, if not already so done, within a further period of four weeks thereafter. The amount finally outstanding shall be computed after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, before

Patna High Court CWJC No.9086 of 2016 (2) dt.13-07-2016 2/2 taking further steps for recovery.

..............................................................." Mr. Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to the representations presented at Annexure-3 series submits that he represented before the Branch Manager requesting him to ensure compliance of the order of this Court but the same has not been responded to by the Branch Manager in terms of the direction of this Court.

In my opinion the directions of this court present in the order passed in C.W.J.C.No.8966 of 2014, are self contained and do not require any reiteration. If the Branch Manager or the Senior Manager as the case may be, has defaulted in ensuring compliance with the direction of this Court then he has made himself liable for contempt but then the jurisdiction is different and the petitioner would have to take recourse to the proper remedy. This Court thus while reminding the Branch Manager/Senior Branch Manager of their obligation, grants liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to the proper remedy available to him for complaining disobedience by the banking authorities.

The writ petition is disposed of.

Bibhash/- (Jyoti Saran, J) U