Sampa Bhattacharjee vs The Bank Of Baroda & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 4799 Cal

    13
26.07.2022
 Ct. No.23
     pg.
                      IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                     CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
                              APPELLATE SIDE

                                WPA 6968 of 2022

                              Sampa Bhattacharjee
                                       Vs.
                            The Bank of Baroda & Ors.


                    Mr. Sandip Ghosh
                    Mr. Partha Sarkar
                                ... For the petitioner

                    Mr. P.K. Tiwari
                    Mr. Rajendra Tiwari
                    Mr. Hemant Tiwari
                                ... For the respondents

The petitioner was engaged as an Individual

Business Correspondent by the Branch Manager of Bank

of Baroda, Paik Para Branch. As an Individual Business

Correspondent, the petitioner was required to perform

certain duties. The nature of engagement of the petitioner

coupled with the duties entrusted on her and the

remuneration payable, clearly demonstrates that she is not

an employee of the Bank but has an agreement with the

Bank for performing certain duties. The writ petition at the

instance of the petitioner seeking the reliefs as claimed

therein is not maintainable in view of the nature of the

petitioner's engagement.

The relationship between the Individual Business

Correspondent with the Bank fell for consideration before

the Rajasthan High Court in a judgment and order dated

28th November, 2018 reported in 2018 SCC OnLine Raj

2141 (State Bank of India v. Ashish Kumar). In the said

judgment of Ashish Kumar (supra), the Hon'ble Division

Bench of the Rajasthan High Court has refused to

entertain the writ petition at the instance of the Individual

Business Correspondent. The Special Leave Petition filed

against the judgment of Ashish Kumar (supra) has also

been rejected.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the writ

petition is dismissed as not maintainable.

Dismissal of this writ petition will, however, not

prevent the petitioner from availing any other remedy

available to her in law for the selfsame cause of action.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if

applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of

necessary formalities.

(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)