Jan Shikshan Sanstha Through Its Member Secretary And Executive Director v. The Chief Manager State Bank Of India And Others
2024:BHC-AUG:25628-DB 1 928.CA-11311-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11311 OF 2024 IN WP/6391/2024 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6391 OF 2024 KALPANA SUBHASH ZAWAR
VERSUS
SATISH SAMPATLAL SURANA AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Soman Amar D.
Advocate for Respondent No.1 & 2 in WP : Mr. S.R. Shirsath Advocate for Petitioner in WP : Mr. Prakash B. Shirsath ...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 18 OCTOBER 2024 PER COURT :
.
This is an application seeking intervention in the writ petition.
2.
We have heard both the sides in respect of the intervention application. We have also heard the learned advocate for the petitioner, wherein the respondents which is State Bank of India and its Officers who have been duly served, but have not caused appearance.
3.
It is merely a matter of issuing directions to the respondents in tune with the observations of the Division Bench of this Court in
2 928.CA-11311-2024.doc Writ Petition No.8577/2023 dated 24.07.2023, whereby the petitioner who was permitted to bring to the notice of the respondent/bank, the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.6604/2011 dated 17.10.2011 and thereafter the respondents were supposed to take necessary decision for opening of the account pursuant to the petitioner's request. 4.
The learned advocate Mr. Soman for the intervenor submits that it is a matter of use of a similar name by the petitioner as also an establishment of which the intervenor is a Chairman. It is also being alleged that the petitioner is misusing the similarity and is also using the PAN number to the detriment of the intervenor. 5.
We are not questioning the genuineness of the grievance being put forth by the intervenor. However the only request that has been made in the writ petition is regarding implementation of the order of this Court, whereby the petitioner was permitted to approach the respondent/bank and the bank was supposed to consider his request in the light of the order of a Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 6604/2011. We cannot address ourselves to all the disputes being raised inter se between the parties, beyond what has been directed by the coordinate division bench of this Court. Even we won't be able to anticipate the consequences. Let the directions be followed as it is.
6.
The writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to
3 928.CA-11311-2024.doc consider the petitioner's application for opening of the account in tune with the order passed in Writ Petition No.8577/2023 dated 24.07.2023 as expeditiously as possible and in any case within four weeks.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J.] Najeeb..