Petitioner directed to approach respondent Bank for one-time settlement scheme within a week. Bank to decide within four weeks. No coercive action till decision. Maintainability and merit left open.
Petitioner directed to approach Bank for settlement within one week; Bank to decide within four weeks; liberty to approach court again.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
| CWP No.: 1385 of 2017 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Date of Decision: 21.07.2017 | ||
| ______________________ Ashok Kumar Nehru |
__________ | ______________________________________ …..Petitioner. |
| Vs. | ||
| State Bank of India | …..Respondent. |
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Ms. Shashi Kiran, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocae. Sanjay Karol, ACJ (Oral):
Learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to an order dated 31.05.2017, passed by this Court in Naresh Dutt Shandilya Vs. Authorized Officer, District Manager, H.P. Cooperative Bank and Ors. CWP No. 1153 of 2017 . It is contended that the petitioner is ready and willing to approach the respondent-Bank and his petition be disposed of in terms of the order passed in CWP No. 1153 of 2017 (supra) . As such, we dispose of the petition on the following terms:
(a) Petitioner shall approach the respondent for availing benefit under one time settlement scheme. This, he shall positively do within a period of one week.
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?
2
(b) Appropriate authority/respondent shall consider and decide the same within a period of four weeks thereafter.
(c ) All codal formalities, if any, shall also be completed by the petitioner within one week.
(d) As is so stated by the learned counsel for the respondent, till and so long, decision is not taken by the appropriate authority/respondent, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner.
(e) Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach this Court, if so required and desired on the same cause of action.
(f) The question of maintainability and
merit of the petition is left open.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of
accordingly.
Copy dasti.
(Sanjay Karol) Acting Chief Justice
(Sandeep Sharma)
Judge
July 21 , 2017 (bhupender)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether competing for a time settlement scheme
Whether court to dispose the petition in similar line of earlier
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Naresh Dutt Shandilya Vs. Authorized Officer, District Manager, H.P. Cooperative Bank and Ors.Relied on¶6
Naresh Dutt Shandilya Vs. Authorized Officer, District Manager, H.P. Cooperative Bank and Ors. CWP No. 1153 of 2017
Ashok Kumar Nehru
State Bank of India
Sanjay Karol
Sandeep Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
