The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a bank employee’s termination. Despite the petitioner’s subsequent acquittal in criminal proceedings, the Court held the petition barred by inordinate delay unexplained by the petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
WP8231-3.2
1/2
PNP
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.8231 OF 2013
Yedery Pandurang Rao
...Petitioner.
versus
Union Bank of India and others
..Respondents.
Mr. Kalpesh Joshi with Mr. Bhojraj Baral i/b Shivani Paranjpe for the Petitioner.
Ms. Rita Joshi with Mr. Swapnil P. Kamble i/b Mr. Ashok D. Shetty for the Respondents.
CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL &
A.S. GADKARI, JJ.
3rd February, 2015.
P.C. :
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
WP8231-3.2
2/2
PNP
properly. The bank is not in possession of old record to counter the submissions made by filing reply.
(Naresh H. Patil, J.)
(A.S. Gadkari, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging termination order is maintainable despite severe delay and inherent latches.
Yedery Pandurang Rao
Union Bank of India
NARESH H. PATIL
A.S. GADKARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
