Jishan Khalifa v. The Punjab National Bank,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9822 of 2025 ====================================================== Jishan Khalifa, Son of Sabir Khalifa, Resident of Village- Nuaon, P.S.- Nuaon, District- Kaimur (Bhabua), Bihar- 802132. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Punjab National Bank, through The Zonal Manager, Punjab National Bank, R Block, Chanakya Tower, 2nd Floor, Patna-800001. 2.

The Zonal Manager, Punjab National Bank, R Block, Chanakya Tower, 2nd Floor, Patna-800001.

3.

The Chief Manager, Punjab National Bank, Human Resource Development Department, Hotel Regal, Ramna Maidan (802301), Arrah. 4.

The Circle Recruitment Authority, Arrah Circle, Punjab National Bank. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the PNB :

Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Ram Ganesh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 30-06-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner who had been working on the post of Sweeper in Punjab National Bank, Nuaon Branch, districtKaimur for maintaining cleanliness and hygiene in the bank premises and also allegedly performed data entry work in computer for a decade, applied for the post of Part-TimeSweeper (PTS) against the advertisement published on 08.09.2017.

3. It is the specific contention of the petitioner that after proper verification of all the testimonials and certificates, the name of the petitioner was figured in the provisional select

Patna High Court CWJC No.9822 of 2025(2) dt.30-06-2025 2/3 list dated 21.05.2021, the copy of which is marked as AnnexureP/2. The name of the petitioner finds placed at serial no.16. The afore-noted letter clearly stipulates that after proper verification of the antecedent, the appointment letter shall be issued.

4. That despite the name of the petitioner figured in the provisionally selected candidate list and having good antecedent, till date the appointment letter has not been issued in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner also sought information under the R.T.I. Act but it has not been specifically disclosed as to whether the claim of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Part-Time-Sweeper was duly considered till date.

5. At this juncture, learned Advocate for the Bank submits that from the letter dated 20.03.2024 issued in response to the application filed under the R.T.I. Act, 2005, it appears that out of 49 candidates only 37 candidates have been appointed. So far 12 candidates are concerned, their documents have not been found to be appropriate and accordingly their candidatures have been cancelled.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and considering the limited grievance of the petitioner that till date he has not been apprised regarding outcome of the selection process; in order to give quietus to the litigation, for

Patna High Court CWJC No.9822 of 2025(2) dt.30-06-2025 3/3 the ends of justice, this Court directs the petitioner to approach before the respondent no.3 by filing an appropriate application.

7. In case, such application is filed, preferably within a period of four weeks from today, respondent no.3 shall apprise the petitioner with regard to the present position

8. Needless to observe that in case the matter regarding selection of the petitioner is pending, the same must be brought to its logical conclusion within a further period of twelve weeks, in accordance with law.

9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed off.

(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U