IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3307 of 2025 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11685 of 2024 ====================================================== Shubham Singh Son of Sanjeev Kumar Resident of Flat No.- 106, Purnima Apartment, Salimpur Ahra, Gali No.- 01, Kadam Kuan, Patna Bihar- 800003. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Canara Bank through Mr. Satyanarayan Raju, the C.E.O., Head Office, Bangaluru Bangaluru- 560002. 2. Mr. K.V.R. Murthy, The General Manager HR Canara Bank, Head Office, Bengaluru- 566002. 3. Mr. Ambaji T Navale, (The Assistant General Manager), Deputy General Manager (HRM) Canara Bank, HRM Section, Circle Office/HOSA/ SAS, INSP, WING Lavkush Tower, Exhibition Road, Patna. 4. Mr. Rajeev Kumar, The Senior Manager Canara Bank HRM Section, Circle Office, Exhibition Road, Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the O.P. Bank : Mr. Sanjiv Kumar.Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 2 19-08-2026 Heard the parties. 2. The present application has been preferred : "for initiation of contempt proceeding against the contemnors/opposite parties for their willful disobedience of the order dated 26.06.2025 passed in C. W. J. C. No. 11685 of 2024 ." 3. This Court takes note of the reasoned order dated 01.09.2025 passed by the Assistant General Manager of Canara Patna High Court MJC No.3307 of 2025(2) dt.19-08-2026 2/3 Bank by which, after recording that they have been financially supported, compassionate appointment cannot be extended, the claim was rejected. It has been further concluded that if they are not satisfied, can prefer appeal within six months under Clause (18) of I.C./4/ 2025 dated 01.01.2025 and utilize the opportunity to submit details which were not submitted. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner after some argument, submits that it would suffice if he is allowed to approach the appellate authority, though the order is of 01.09.2025 and the six months period has lapsed, as he was pursuing the contempt matter. 5. This Court is of the opinion that when a reasoned order has been passed, no contempt is made out. 6. However, the fact remains that the petitioner was pursuing this case and as such, the six months period has lapsed, in that background, if the petitioner prefers an appeal within the next four weeks, the appellate authority shall be entertaining the petition alongwith limitation petition, allow the same as genuinely and under bona-fide belief, he was pursuing the contempt petition. 7. The said relief has been granted only for the period of four weeks and if the petitioner jumps the said period, it can Patna High Court MJC No.3307 of 2025(2) dt.19-08-2026 3/3 be rejected on the basis of the delay in filing the appeal. 6. With the aforesaid observation, MJC No. 3307 of 2025 stands disposed of. ankita/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U