Canara Bank v. The National Commission For Scheduled Castes & ANR

$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1340/2017 & CM 6114/2017 CANARA BANK .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Rajesh Kumar and Mr. Aakash Sehrawat, Advocates versus THE NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULED CASTES & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Anil Panwar, CGSC and Mr. Abhimanyu Chauhan, Advocate for respondent No. 1 Ms. Sapna Malik and Mr. Manjunath M.T., Advocates for respondent No. 2

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

O R D E R

% 14.03.2018 Vide impugned Communication of 18th January, 2017, first respondent recommends to petitioner-Bank to review the case of petitioner and submit an Action Taken Report. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that case of second respondent-Dalbir Singh Grover has been reviewed and he now stands promoted. However, petitioner's counsel is aggrieved by the direction in the impugned Communication of submitting an Action Taken Report. Since the recommendation is not binding upon petitioner, therefore, the direction to petitioner to submit Action Taken Report will not have a binding effect. With aforesaid clarification, this petition and the application are disposed of.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE MARCH 14, 2018/s