Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21116 (RAJ)

KHEM CHAND S/O SHRI MAHENDRA SINGH v. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

CW/9510/2024 · 2025-09-24

Maneesh Sharma

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:39304] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9510/2024 Khem Chand S/o Shri Mahendra Singh, aged about 35 Years, R/o Heerapur, Post Pinchoona District Bharatpur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Punjab National Bank, Human Resources Division, Head Office Plot No.4, Sector-10 Dwarka New Delhi - 110075 Through Chief General Manager. 2. Division Head, Punjab National Bank, Divisional Officer Bharatpur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J.K. Moolchandani For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 24/09/2025 1. In the writ petition, the petitioner has raised various issues. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner, upon instructions from his client, submitted that he would be satisfied if: the petitioner is permitted to file a fresh representation before the respondent No.2-Division Head, Punjab National Bank, Divisional Officer Bharatpur encapsulating the grievance(s) raised in the present writ petition; and if a direction may be issued to respondent No.2 to decide the same in a time bound manner. 2. Heard and considered the submissions made at bar. 3. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before respondent No.2 within a period of four (4) weeks from today. The [2025:RJ-JP:39304] (2 of 2) [CW-9510/2024] respondent No.2 is directed to decide the said representation within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of filing of such representation by a speaking order, strictly in accordance with law. 4. It is made clear that the aforesaid direction to decide such representation has been issued only with a view to ensure an expeditious redressal of the petitioner's grievance. The same shall not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner. 5. Furthermore, it is needless to say that after adjudication of the representation, if any cause of action still survives, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail further remedies available under the law. 6. Other pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of, accordingly. (MANEESH SHARMA),J DEEPA-43