HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 5614 of 2025 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, J. HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J. 1. The present writ petition has been filed praying for writ of mandamus, commanding the respondent-bank to refund the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- as against two banker's cheques issued by the bank for Rs. 50,000/- each along with the interest. 2. The banker's cheque was got issued by the petitioner in favour of Nagar Nigam as collateral security for participating in e-tender. The petitioner has earlier approached this Court by filing Writ-C No. 35284 of 2021, praying for direction to Nagar Nigam to refund the amount as against the banker's cheque. In the said case, the Nagar Nigam took the defence that the banker's cheques were not encashed by it as the same was only taken as collateral security for participation in e-tender process. 3. Having regard to the said submission, the said writ petition was disposed of by order dated 08.02.2022, permitting the petitioner to approach the bank for getting the banker's cheque cancelled and for refund of the money. Relevant part of the said order is as follows: "Ms. Saumya Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner has expressed apprehension and possible difficulties in encashment of banker's cheque in question. She submitted that the banker's cheque was got prepared by the wife of the petitioner who is since dead, therefore, the petitioner may face difficulty in getting it cancelled. However, in our opinion, any difficulty which the petitioner may face in getting banker's cheque cancelled could not be a Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Archana Singh, Prem Shankar Kushwaha Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ramesh Kumar Shukla Amar Singh Kushwaha .....Petitioner(s) Central Bank Of India And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) reason for directing Nagar Nigam to issue cheque in favour of the petitioner, when the banker's cheque was only kept as a collateral security and was never encashed. At the same time, we direct respondents 2 and 3 to offer all assistance to the petitioner as may be required by the bank in getting the banker's cheque cancelled and money refunded from the bank. Counsel for respondents 2 and 3 states that if any document is required to be issued by respondents 2 and 3 in this regard, it will be done as soon as the petitioner or the bank makes request for it. In view of the statement made by counsel for the respondents 2 and 3, we dispose of the writ petition accordingly." 4. It seems that thereafter in pursuance of the said order, the petitioner made application before the bank for cancellation of banker's cheque and for refund of the money. Since the same was not honored therefore, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the amount has been refunded by transfer to the account of the petitioner during pendency of the present writ petition. 6. In view of the fact that the amount against the banker's cheque has already been refunded, the cause has been rendered infructuous. 7. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. September 10, 2025 A. Mandhani WRIC No. 5614 of 2025 2 (Arun Kumar,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK MANDHANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad