Dismissed

Smt. Gaadiraju Savithri v. The Assistant General Manager

Telangana HC17 Feb 2012WP/12444/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition where the petitioner sought to prevent the respondent bank from inventorying her locker. The court observed that due to allegations of misappropriation and pending criminal and departmental proceedings, the bank had the right to take inventory of the locker in the presence of the petitioner.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt. Gaadiraju Savithri Vs The Assistant General Manager — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWELVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA

¶5

WRIT PETITION No.12444 of 2011

¶6

Between: Smt.Gaadiraju Savithri

¶7

..... PETITIONER

¶8

AND

¶9

The Assistant General Manager, State Bank of Hyderabad, Region-1, Zonal Office, Visakhapatnam and another

¶10

.....RESPONDENTS

¶11

The Court made the following:

¶12

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA

¶13

WRIT PETITION No.12444 of 2011

¶14

O R D E R:

¶15

The petitioner has prayed that a direction be issued to the respondents not to take inventory of the locker of the petitioner and prepare a Panchanama and thereafter keep the articles found in the locker intact after recording the fact in the Panchanama, pursuant to the proceedings dated 05.04.2011.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that it is the personal

¶17

locker of the petitioner and the same cannot be seized nor can any inventory be made.

¶18

Learned counsel for the respondents states that the petitioner was an employee in the respondent bank and there are allegations of largescale misappropriation against the petitioner and a case in Cr.No.692/2010 of Muvvalavanipalem PS Zone was registered against her. It is submitted that in view of the allegations made against the petitioner and pendency of the enquiry, the Bank has decided to take the inventory of the locker of the petitioner and prepare a Panchanama.

¶19

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered opinion that there are allegations of misappropriation against the petitioner, regarding which, not only a departmental enquiry is going on, but also a criminal case was also registered against her, and hence the respondent Bank has got right to take inventory of the locker of the petitioner and prepare a Panchanama. It is made clear that the inventory of the locker shall be made in the presence of the petitioner and the petitioner is expected to cooperate with the respondents.

¶20

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of, with the above observations. No order as to costs.

¶21

______________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA,J

¶22

Dated: 17.02.2012 Dsr

Smt. Gaadiraju Savithri v. The Assistant General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Smt. Gaadiraju Savithri v. The Assistant General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prathi Koteswara Rao Vs Mr. Jagan Mohan Rao

Laxmi Narayana Exporters, D.No.1-163,E-Block Vs Union of india., rep.by its Secretary, Ministry of

M/s.Taiko Chandernagar Chemicals Pvt.Ltd Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary

M/s. Ivrcl-Infrastructures and Projects Limited Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Kuchu Pruthvi Kumar Vs The Regional Passport Officer

M/s Patel Engineering Limited, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh