Rekha Devi v. Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank Through Its Chairman And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1832 of 2016 ====================================================== Rekha Devi, wife of Late Dina Nath Prasad, resident of Kharanja Road, Sinha Model High School, State Boring, P.S.- Danapur, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank through its Chairman, Head Office- Kalambagh chowk, Muzaffarpur.
2. Mr. I.M. Utreja, son of not known to the petitioner, The Chairman, Uttar Gramin Bank, Head Office- Kalambagh chowk, Muzaffarpur.
3. Mr. V. Lakshman Raw, son of not known to the petitioner, The General Manager (Retirement Benefit), Uttar Gramin Bank, Head OfficeKalambagh chowk, Muzaffarpur. l
4. Rajan Kumar Gupta, son of not known to the petitioner, The Regional Manager, Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, Gopalganj.
5. Mr. S.K. Jha, son of not known to the petitioner, Senior Manager (retirement benefit), Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank, Head Office- Kalambagh Chowk, Muzaffarpur.
6. Mr. R.K. Sinha, son of not known to the petitioner, Employee Provident Fund Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Surya Complex, Laxmi Chowk, Muzaffarpur.
.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinay Ranjan,Ved. For the Respondent/s : Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 16-08-2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, so far as the order of the learned writ Court is concerned, it has been complied with but the petitioner has got a claim with regard to certain demands which has been rejected by the Bank and for that she would seek liberty to raise her grievance in an appropriate proceeding.
In view of the statements made at the Bar, this application
Patna High Court MJC No.1832 of 2016 (2) dt.16-08-2018 2/2 has become infructuous and is disposed off, accordingly. In case the petitioner has any other claim which has not been agitated earlier and the petitioner wants to agitate the same now, disposal of the present contempt application will not come in her way.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Arvind/R.R.Ojha/Ved U