Jagannath Prasad v. The State Bank Of India, Through Its Chief General Manager, Local Head Office

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1696 of 2024 In Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3237 of 2019 ====================================================== Jagannath Prasad Son of Late Radha Mohan Lal, Resident of Shivaji Path Gola Road, West Baily Road, Post Office- Danapur Cantt, Police StationRupaspur, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State Bank of India, through its Chief General Manager, Local head Office Western Gandhi Maidan, Post Box No. 103, Patna-800001. 2.

Shri Shiva om Dixit The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, Local Head office, Western Gandhi Maidan, Post Box No. 103, Patna-800001. 3.

Shri Vishal Saxena Deputy General Manager, State Bank of India, Zonal Office, Patna.

4.

Shri Sanjeev Kumar the Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, human Resource Department, local Head Office, Western Gandhi Maidan, Patna- 800001.

5.

Shri Ravi Shankar Madhavan Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Mithapur Branch, Patna-800001.

... ... Opposite Partys ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners :

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jha, Advocate For the S.B.I.

:

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH) Date : 11-09-2025 It has been pointed out that a contempt application was preferred against the order dated 01.03.2019 passed in L.P.A. No. 1396 of 2018. The said contempt application was numbered as M.J.C. Case No. 3237 of 2019 which was disposed of vide order dated 11.09.2023 with the following observation:- "3. Accordingly, the present M.J.C. - contempt petition stands dropped, reserving liberty to the petitioner to question the

Patna High Court MJC No.1696 of 2024 dt.11-09-2025 2/2 validity of calculation. If he is still aggrieved, he is at liberty to submit a detailed representation to the concerned authority for consideration. If such representation is submitted, the concerned authority shall examine the same and proceed to pass orders within a reasonable period of time."

2. The present contempt application has been filed as the above referred observation has not been complied with.

3. The show-cause has already been filed in pursuance to the above referred order and the Opposite Parties have already complied with the order dated 11.09.2023 which is Annexure-P/4 to the contempt petition.

4. Considering the facts that the order dated 11.09.2023 passed in M.J.C. Case No. 3237 of 2019 has already been complied with, the present contempt application stands disposed of.

(Sudhir Singh, J) (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Sachin/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 12.09.2025 Transmission Date 12.09.2025