Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17328 (JHR)

ABHISHEK v. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY GENERAL, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

WPC/807/2026 · 2026-06-16

Deepak Roshan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:17579 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 807 of 2026 --------- ABHISHEK, aged about 42 years, Son of Nand Kishore Singh, Resident of At-Near Naunihal International School, Brahmpura, Anandpuri, P.O.-M.I.T Brahampura, P.S.-Brahampura, District- Muzaffarpur, 842003, Bihar ....Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The Union of India through Secretary General, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi-110011, P.O.-Nirman Bhawan SO, PS-Parliament Street Police Station. 2. Indian Bank, through the managing Director & CEO, Corporate Office, Chennai, 600014, Avvai Shanmugham Salai, Gopalpuram P.O.-Royapettah, P.S-Triplicane 3. General Manager (HRM), Indian Bank, Corporate Office, Chennai., 600014 Avvai Shanmugham Salai, Gopalpuram P.O.- Royapettah, P.S-Triplicane 4. Assistant General Manager (HRM), Indian Bank, Corporate Office, Chennai, 600014 Avvai Shanmugham Salai, Gopalpuram P.O.-Royapettah, P.S-Triplicane 5. Zonal Manager, Indian Bank, Zonal Office, Dharmpuri, 1st Floor, DDC Building, 91 Pennagram Road, P.O.-Dharmapuri Tamilnadu, P.S.-Dharmapuri Town, 636701 ....Respondent(s) --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --------- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek S. Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Harendra Kr. Mahto, Sr. Panel Counsel --------- 03/Dated:-16.06.2026 1. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing the transfer order; however, for the reason best known to the petitioner, the same is not on record. 2. However, from Annexure-1 series, it appears that a request was made to the Corporate Office Chennai of the respondent-Bank for reconsideration for transfer; however, nothing has been done. Accordingly no relief can be granted to the petitioner from this side. 3. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands dismissed. The petitioner would be at liberty to approach the concerned respondent, if so advised. (Deepak Roshan, J.) JUNE 16, 2026 vikas/- uploaded 22/06/2026