(1) 103.wp.6827.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.6827 OF 2026 Kundan Shrawan Humane Vs. Bank of Baroda, through Chairman and Managing Director, Corporate Office, Mumbai and others -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A. B. Wani, Advocate for petitioner. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ. DATED : 22/09/2026 1. Heard Mr. Wani, learned counsel for the petitioner. In compliance of the order dated 15.09.2026 passed by this Court, Mr. Wani, learned counsel for the petitioner, tendered across the bar, the judgment of the High Court of Calcutta reported in 1996(2) CLJ 425 in the case of Ramkishor Tewari Vs. The Assistant General Manager (CCR), Bank of Baroda and Ors. 2. In the aforesaid judgment, the Calcutta High Court relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held the Bank of Baroda being a Nationalised Bank is an instrumentality of the State and thus falls within the definition of the State as contemplated under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. 3. Mr. Wani, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.1 Bank in compliance of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India passed in Civil Appeal 2026:BHC-NAG:12636-DB (2) 103.wp.6827.2026 No.10815/2018 [Kundan Shrawan Humane Vs. Chairman Cum Managing Director Dena Bank and Ors] dated 30.10.2018 has reinstated the petitioner in the service and has also granted continuity of service. However, so far as the claim of the other service benefits of the petitioners are concerned, the petitioner has approached before this Court. The various claims as prayed by the petitioner pertains to verification of the original Attendance Register/Muster Roll records of Akola Branch, so also treating the period of 23.07.2008 to 13.05.2009 as Loss of Pay for 294 days and other consequential benefits. 4. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India while dealing with such claim as raised by the petitioner in Contempt Petition No.143/2021 [Kundan Shrawan Humane Vs. Sanjiv Chadha and Ors.] has passed an order on 03.02.2023 which reads thus: “3. Having regard to the circumstances of the case, we, of course, leave it open for the petitioner to pursue his representations said to be pending with the employer-Bank, and we trust and expect that other aspects of the matter shall be duly taken care of by the employer in accordance with law. We also leave it open for the petitioner in taking recourse to appropriate regular remedies, in case of any grievance remaining yet.” 5. In view of the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Contempt Petition No.143/2021 (supra), the petitioner had submitted representation to his employer for such service benefits. Mr. Wani, learned counsel for the petitioner invites our attention to one such last representation dated 27.05.2026, which is on record at Page No.70 (Annexure E). Mr. Wani, learned counsel for the petitioner (3) 103.wp.6827.2026 submits that the respondent No.1 has not yet decided such representation made on behalf of the petitioner and hence, the petitioner has no remedy but to approach this Court praying for such claims. 6. In view of the above, and more specifically, in view of the observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Contempt Petition No.143/2021 (supra), we dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the respondents, and more specifically, respondent No.4 Deputy General Manager, Bank of Baroda, Bhubaneswar, Orissa to consider and decide the claim as raised by the petitioner in the representation dated 27.05.2026 on its own merits and in accordance with law and more specifically, in view of the judgment dated 30.10.2018 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.10815/2018 (supra) filed by the petitioner. The decision thereupon shall be taken within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of the order of this Court. 7. The petitioner undertakes to produce a copy of the order passed by this Court before the respondent No.4 within a period of one week from today. 8. The decision taken thereupon shall be communicated to the petitioner within a period of two weeks, thereafter. 9. Writ petition is accordingly, disposed of. No costs. (RAJ D. WAKODE, J) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J) Sarkate Signed by: Mr. A.R. Sarkate Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 23/09/2026 19:55:54