Mrityunjai Kumar Rai vs Union Of India, Ministry Of Finance ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 9968 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Mrityunjai Kumar Rai vs Union Of India, Ministry Of Finance ... on 29 August, 2025

Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:152095
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
WRIT - A No. - 20983 of 2024
 
Court No. - 5
 
HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

1. Heard Sri Rahul Sripat, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Dr. Vishnu Pandey, learend counsel for petitioner and Sri Ashok Mehtra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Deepak Kapoor, learned counsel for respondent-Bank.

2. This Court has no reason to take a contrary view in present matter since an order on the basis of similar set of facts was passed in Shri Krishan Nath vs. The Industrial Development Bank of India and 2 others, 2025:AHC:145810 and for reference, said order is quoted below :-

"1. Heard Sri Ravi Kant, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Krishna Kant Tiwari, learned counsel for respondent.

2. The argument of learned counsel for petitioner that IDBI Bank will fall within the State under article 12 is being rejected by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Deepak Sadana Vs. Union of India and 3 others, 2022:AHC:184115, therefore, reliance placed on a judgment passed by Rajasthan High Court in Syed Sharji Hussain Vs. IDBI Bank Ltd. and Anr., 2016 (3) RLW 2235, wherein a contrary view was taken has only a persuasive value.

3. It is also informed that similar view has been taken by Bombay High Court, Rajasthan High Court and Jharkhand High Court, which are under challenge before Supreme Court, therefore, at this stage, the Court is not taking any contrary view taken by co-ordinate Bench of this Court, therefore, the prayer made by petitioner is rejected, however, petitioner will have liberty to file a review application in case, the issue is crystalize by the Supreme Court in his favour.

4. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observations."

3. This writ petition is disposed of in terms of judgment of Shri Krishan Nath (supra) along with remedy referred above.

August 29, 2025

N. Sinha