Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court

Md. Nawazish Ali vs The Punjab National Bank And Ors on 26 September, 2023

Author: Rajiv Roy

Bench: Rajiv Roy

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                     Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 5448 of 2018
     ======================================================
     Md Nawazish Ali S/o Late Md Ali Imam, Resident of Village+P.O.- Patut,
     P.S.- Rani Talab, District- Patna.

                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                      Versus
1.   The Punjab National Bank, Divisional office, Chanakya Tower, R Block,
     Patna through its General Manager, Punjab National Bank, Divisional
     Office, Chanakya Tower, R Block, Patna
2.   The Assistant General Manager, Punjab National Bank Divisional Office,
     Chanakya Tower, R Block, Patna
3.   The Senior Manager, Punjab National Bank, Human Resources Department,
     Central Office, R Block, Patna
4.   The Chief Manager, Punjab National Bank, Human Resources Department,
     Chanakya Tower, R Block, Patna

                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s   :    M/s Siya Ram Shahi, Shally Kumari, Advocates
     For the Respondent/s   :    M/s Mritunjay Kr, Ram Ganesh, Vibhuti Kr,
                                     Advocatess
     ======================================================
     CORAM:     HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

                                ORAL JUDGMENT

      Date : 26-09-2023


                 Heard Mr Siya Ram Shahi, duly assisted by Ms Shally

     Kumari and Mr Mritunjay Kumar, learned counsel for the

     respondents.

                 2 Prayer is for the following reliefs:

                       "(i) for issuance of an appropriate writ
             commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioner on
             the post of Peon in respondent Bank in pursuance of the
             advertisement dated 05.06.2016 issued under the
             signature of Assistant General Manager, PNB, R Block,
             Chanakya Tower, Patna contained in Annexure 1.
 Patna High Court CWJC No.5448 of 2018 dt.26-09-2023
                                           2/3




                           (ii) For any other relief or reliefs for which the
                petitioner is entitled under law as well as on the facts of
                the case."

                       3 An advertisement was issued by the Bank on

       05.06.2016

for the post of Peon. A corrigendum was also issued 15 days later on 20.06.2016 and it is necessary to incorporate column 4 of the corrigendum which reads as follows:

^^4- vk/kh v/kwjh o vlR; tkudkjh okys vkosnu Lor% fujLr ekus tk;saxsA vik= vH;kfFkZ;ksa ds lkFk fdlh Hkh rjg dk i= O;ogkj ugha fd;k tk;sxkA** 4 It is the case of the respondents that a criminal case bearing Rani Talab PS Case No 97 of 2015 dated 03.10.2015 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 467, 468, 420, 120B and other allied sections of Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act was pending against the petitioner. The Bank further has narrated that this fact was concealed by the petitioner and only when one Srikant Sharma sent a letter, the same was enquired into where after the petitioner, in the light of said advertisement, was not considered as a result he was not allowed to join.
5 Mr Siya Ram Shahi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that subsequently after compromise between the parties, the petitioner was acquitted in the year, 2018. He, as such, submits that this fact should have been considered by the Bank.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5448 of 2018 dt.26-09-2023 3/3 6 The advertisement/corrigendum of the Bank was very clear. The candidate was supposed to give complete information and any wrong/false information would result in forfeiture/cancellation of his/her candidature.

7 In this case, admittedly, the petitioner was facing a criminal proceeding which he did not mention at the time of submission of his application.

8 In that view of the matter, the Bank was justified in taking the decision of not allowing the petitioner to join the post on which he was selected.

9 This Court does not find any merit in this case which is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Rajiv Roy, J) M.E.H./-

AFR/NAFR                    NAFR
CAV DATE                      NA
Uploading Date            03.10.2023
Transmission Date             NA