Patna High Court
Pooja KumariversusThe State Bank of India through Shri Anurag Joshi, Chief General Manager
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that the bank had complied by passing a final order, so no contempt existed and the contempt proceeding was closed.
Summary
Petitioner Pooja Kumari, a State Bank of India employee, sought reconsideration of a transfer grievance after the High Court ordered the bank to pass a reasoned order within 30 days. The bank issued a final order through its Assistant General Manager, which the petitioner claimed did not comply with the Court’s directive, leading her to file a contempt application. The bank argued that any further grievance could be raised by filing an appropriate application. The Court examined the submissions and found that the bank had indeed issued a final order, thereby satisfying the earlier direction. Consequently, the Court saw no basis to continue the contempt proceeding and closed the contempt petition, while allowing the petitioner to challenge the bank’s order in the appropriate forum if desired.
Issues considered
- Whether the bank's issuance of a final order amounts to willful disobedience of the High Court's order, constituting contempt.
- Whether the petitioner must be compelled to file a fresh application to challenge the bank's order, or if the contempt proceeding should be continued.
Subjects
- contempt
- writ jurisdiction
- bank transfer
- employee rights
- reasoned order
- court compliance
- civil procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2825 of 2025
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10090 of 2025
======================================================
Pooja Kumari Daughter of Raj Kumar Singh and Wife of Ravi Ranjan Kumar
Resident of Vill.- Galchaur, P.S.- Krishnagarh, Dist.- Bhojpur (Ara), presently
residing at Flat No.- 406, Block- B, Pataliputra Heritage Apartment, Gandhi
Nagar, Near Pataliputra Station, P.S.- Digha.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Bank of India through Shri Anurag Joshi, Chief General Manager
State Bank of India, Local Head Office, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna-
800001.
2. Kumari Nivedita, Assistant General Manager, Human Resources/Industrial
Relations Department, State Bank of India, Local Head Office, West Gandhi
Maidan, Patna- 800001.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bipin Krishna Singh, Adv.
Mr. Kundan Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 06-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. Application is filed for initiation of a contempt
proceeding against the concerned opposite parties for their
willful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated
07.07.2025 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 10090 of 2025 by a Bench of
this Court. By the order under contempt, the learned Court while
disposing the writ petition has been pleased to observe as
follows:-
“10. Taking into consideration the
fact that the respondent-Bank
itself wrongly transferred the
Patna High Court MJC No.2825 of 2025(3) dt.06-02-2026
2/3
petitioner way back in the year
2021 and the said wrong done by
the Bank has been rectified by
them after about three and half
years of her transfer. Further
taking into consideration the fact
that in between the petitioner,
being a lady, got her marriage
with one employee of the bank
itself, who is posted at Patna, the
guidelines as mentioned
hereinabove permit the spouse to
be posted at the place of posting
of her spouse or nearby place.
Thus, on these grounds, I am of
the view that this petition can be
disposed of directing the
respondent-Bank to reconsider the
claim of the petitioner afresh and
pass a reasoned order.
11. Accordingly, the petition is
disposed of. The respondent-Bank
is directed to reconsider the claim
of the petitioner and pass a
reasoned order as early as
possible within 30 days from
today.”
3. It is the contention of the petitioner that despite the
order having been passed by this Court to consider the claim of
the petitioner in view of the findings given in the afore-noted
order, the opposite party bank has failed to consider the same
and pass the so called reasoned order on 30.07.2025, hence in
any view of the matter, there is no compliance of the order of
this Court in its letter and spirit.
4. Learned Advocate for the Bank refuting the afore-
Patna High Court MJC No.2825 of 2025(3) dt.06-02-2026
3/3
noted contention submitted that once the bank has passed the
reasoned and speaking order, if the petitioner has any grievance,
he may assail that order by filing an appropriate application.
5. Having considered the submissions advanced by
learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of
the fact that on representation of the petitioner, a final order has
been passed by the Assistant General Manager of the State Bank
of India. This Court does not find any reason or occasion to
continue with the present contempt proceeding, accordingly the
same stands closed.
7. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to assail
the afore-noted order by filing an appropriate application before
the appropriate forum, if so advised.
(Harish Kumar, J)
supratim/-
U
Checking your session…