Dismissed

Sri Uma Shankar Ram v. The Bank Of India Through The Chairman And Managing Director and Ors.

Patna HC13 Dec 2019L.P.A/691/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal against a writ order under Article 227 as non-maintainable, relying on the Apex Court decision in Shah Babulal Khimji, leaving the appellant with a statutory remedy. The order is an oral summary dismissing the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed on ground of non-maintainability; appellant directed to seek statutory remedy.

Sri Uma Shankar Ram Vs The Bank Of India… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.691 of 2017

¶2

¶3

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17124 of 2012

¶4

======================================================

¶5

Sri Uma Shankar Ram Son of Sri Lalji Ram , Ex Staff Clerk Bank of India Resident of Village- Bharhria, Post Office- Deohalia, Police Station Ramgarh, District- RohtasSasaram.

¶6

... ... Appellant/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Bank Of India Through The Chairman And Managing Director and Ors

¶9

The Zonal Manager Bank of India having his office at Zonal Office Chnakya Tower, Birchand Patel Mar

¶10

The Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Labour and Employment , New Delhi.

¶11

¶12

The Chief Labour Commissioner (Central) New Delhi.

¶13

The Assistant Director, I.R. (IMPI), Ministry of Labour and Employment, New Delhi.

¶14

¶15

The Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Patna, Bihar.

¶16

The Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) Ministry of Labour, Government of India, Maurya Lok Complex, Block-A, 2^nd Floor, Dak Banglow, Patna, Bihar.

¶17

... ... Respondent/s

¶18

======================================================

¶19

Appearance :

¶20

For the Appellant/s : Mr.Birendra Kumar Jha, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rupak Kumar, Advocate. Soc. Gen. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER

¶21

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶22

4 13-12-2019 We notice that on 28.02.2017, the writ court passed

¶23

the following order:

¶24

“At the outset, learned counsel for the private respondent no. 6 raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has filed the present writ application only under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

¶25

Patna High Court L.P.A No.691 of 2017(4) dt.13-12-2019 2/3

¶26

and hence the application would not be maintainable. He submitted that the challenge in the present writ application is to the order of award passed by the Presiding Officer of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal which can only be seen by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶27

On such objection having been raised by the learned counsel for the private respondent no. 6, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he may be permitted to add the provision of Article 227 of the Constitution of India in the cause title of the present application.

¶28

Leave is granted. Let the amendment be made in the course of the day.

¶29

The petitioner must deposit the required court fee by tomorrow.

¶30

Put up the matter under the same heading on 2^nd March, 2017.”

¶31

The writ petition, registered under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, was disposed of by impugned judgment dated 06.03.2017, which is the subject matter of this appeal.

¶32

Learned counsel for the appellant herein (respondent in the writ petition) has rightly raised the objection with regard to maintainability of the present appeal in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Shah Babulal Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kania & Anr.; (1981) 4 SCC 8 .

¶33

As such, we do not find the present appeal to be

¶34

Patna High Court L.P.A No.691 of 2017(4) dt.13-12-2019 3/3

¶35

maintainable and dispose of the same on the ground of nonmaintainability, leaving it open for the appellant herein to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

¶36

(Sanjay Karol, CJ)

¶37

( Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J)

¶38

sujit/-

¶39

Sri Uma Shankar Ram v. The Bank Of India Through The Chairman And Managing Director and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Uma Shankar Ram v. The Bank Of India Through The Chairman And Managing Director and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaista Praween @ Shaishta Praween Vs The State Of Bihar Through Sri Chaitanya Prasad, Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department

Sudhir Kumar Ojha @ Sudhir Kumar Vs The Union of India

Ravish Kumar Verma Vs Honble High Court of Judicature at Patna

The State Of Bihar and Ors. Vs M/s Dhanpat Prasad Singh

The State Of Bihar and Ors. Vs M/s B. D. Construction Through Its Partner Mr. Gajraj Kumar

Jagarnath Mahto Vs The State of Bihar