Avneet Kumar Alias Balla vs State Bank Of India And Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 9413 P&H

                                                       Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:084375



                                                         2023:PHHC:084375
CWP-22623-2021                                                                   -1-



      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH

110                                           CWP-22623-2021
                                              Date of Decision: 05.07.2023

Avneet Kumar Alias Balla                                            ...Petitioner


                                   Versus


State Bank of India and Another                                ...Respondents


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present:-   Mr. Karan Garg, Advocate for the petitioner
            Mrs. Madhu Dayal, Advocate for respondents-SBI
            ***
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner through instant writ petition under Articles

226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of letter

dated 26.11.2019 (Annexure P-3) whereby respondent-bank has struck

off name of the petitioner from the roll of employees.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that

name of the petitioner has been struck off from roll of employees by

holding that petitioner voluntarily vacated his employment w.e.f.

29.09.2019. The petitioner was falsely implicated in FIR No.56 dated

21.06.2018 under Section 22 of NDPS Act registered at Police Station

Lahori Gate, Patiala. The petitioner was arrested on 21.06.2018 and he

was released on 08.09.2020. The petitioner had preferred an appeal

before this Court against judgment dated 04.09.2020 whereby petitioner

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:084375

2023:PHHC:084375

was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment of 6 months. The appeal

of the petitioner has been allowed vide judgment dated 01.06.2023

passed in CRA-S-1544-2020 by this Court. Thus, petitioner without

considering facts and circumstances of the petition has been punished by

the respondent-bank.

3. Ms. Madhu Dayal, who on advance notice is present in

Court, fairly submits that respondent-bank would look into

representation of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order considering

grievance of the petitioner.

Without commenting upon merits of the case and in view of

the statement made by learned counsel for the respondent-bank, the

present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-

bank to decide representation of the petitioner within six weeks from

today.

                                                     (JAGMOHAN BANSAL)
                                                            JUDGE
05.07.2023
Mohit Kumar
              Whether speaking/reasoned              Yes/No
              Whether reportable                     Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:084375

2 of 2