Disposed

Ajit Kumar Srivastava v. The Canara Bank Through Its Divisional Manager and Ors.

Patna HC25 Apr 2019CWJC/2266/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an oral order, the Patna High Court directed a State-instrumentality bank to independently decide within 60 days on pending reimbursement bills submitted by a Recovery Agent. The court held the bank must consider the bills or communicate rejection, ruling that inaction violates its duty.

What did the court decide?

The respondent Bank was directed to take an independent decision on the petitioner's claim on pending professional fee bills within 60 days of receiving this order; if not payable, the reason must be

Ajit Kumar Srivastava Vs The Canara Bank Through Its… — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2266 of 2019

¶2

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

¶3

Ajit Kumar Srivastava aged about 47 years (Male) son of Mankeshwar Prasad, Founder of M.S. Risk Management, R/o- Gopala Math, P.S. Thawe, Dist- Gopalganj.

¶4

... ... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The Canara Bank through its Divisional Manager, Circle Office, Exhibition Road, Patna.

¶7

The General Manager, Canara Bank patna

¶8

The General Manager, Canara Bank Muzaffarpur

¶9

The Regional Manager, Canara Bank Muzaffarpur

¶10

The Senior Manager, Canara Manager Gopalganj Branch, District – Gopalganj.

¶11

The Branch Manager, Canara Bank Bhore Branch, District - Gopalganj

¶12

The Loan Officer, Canara Bank main branch, Gopalganj

¶13

The Branch Manager, Canara bank Sasa Musa Branch, Gopalganj

¶14

The Branch Manager, Canara Bank Barhariya Branch, Dist-Siwan

¶15

The Branch Manager, Canara Bank Ekderwa Branch, District- Gopalganj

¶16

The Branch Manager, Canara Bank Bhore Branch,Gopalganj

¶17

The Branch Manager, Canara Bank Badhariya Branch, Dist-Gopalganj

¶18

The Branch Manager Canara Bank , Mairwa Branch, District – Siwan.

¶19

... ... Respondents

¶20

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjan Kumar Srivastava, Advocate Ms. Rajni Gandha, Advocate Mr. Sunny Raman, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Rajan Ghoshrave, Advocate ======================================================

¶21

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶22

2 25-04-2019 This writ application has been preferred seeking a mandamus for directing the respondents to make payment of professional fee of Rs. 1,44,387/-. It is the case of the petitioner that he was rendering his service as Recovery Agent of Canara Bank in view of the Agreement made on 28.03.2017. The petitioner submitted bills/vouchers but the payments have not

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.2266 of 2019(2) dt.25-04-2019 2/3

¶24

been made to the petitioner.

¶25

Learned counsel for the Bank is present however no plausible reason has been shown as to why the bills of the petitioner, if he has acted as Recovery Agent, has not been considered.

¶26

In the given facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merit of the contention and submission of the petitioner as to his entitlement for payment, this court would only observe that in case the Bank has taken services of the petitioner and the bills of the petitioner are pending with the Bank, the Bank being an instrumentality of the State would be obliged to consider the same and make payment of the admitted amount. In case, the claim of the petitioner is not payable for any reason, the same should also be communicated to the petitioner. At least this much duty is cast upon the State and it’s instrumentality to act and not to remain sitting over on the matter, it would amount to inaction on the part of the Bank.

¶27

Let the respondent Bank take independent decision thereon within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶28

If the claim of the petitioner is not payable the same should also be communicated to him and in that case the

¶29

Patna High Court CWJC No.2266 of 2019(2) dt.25-04-2019 3/3

¶30

petitioner may seek his remedy before an appropriate court/forum.

¶31

The writ application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶32

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

¶33

Rajeev/- U

Ajit Kumar Srivastava v. The Canara Bank Through Its Divisional Manager and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajit Kumar Srivastava v. The Canara Bank Through Its Divisional Manager and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bijay Kumar Sharma Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Suresh Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

M/s Sai Traders Through Its Proprietor Namely Rajesh Mohan Vs Bihar State Food And Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Fuldev Ray Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Md. Shahnwaj Alam Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

M/s a B C L Construction At Pachgachhi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.