01.07.2026 25 sdas WPA 11783 of 2026 Mr. Jishnu Dey vs. Indian Bank Limited & Ors. Mr. Debottam Das ….. for the petitioner Ms. Aparna Banerjee, learned AGP Mr. Brijendra Pratap Singh …..for the State Mr. Shiv Mangal Singh ….. for the respondent Bank 1. Let supplementary affidavit, as filed in Court, be kept on record. 2. The petitioner’s grievance on the basis of which the writ petition was filed viz (i) that he had completed the period of service beyond two years and hence his service had to be regularized and he cannot be kept on probation in eternity and (ii) he cannot be posted as an Assistant Manager, while on probation, has now been addressed sufficiently. 3. Mr. Singh, learned Advocate appearing for the respondent Bank, has taken instructions and submits that the service of the petitioner has been confirmed on June 30, 2026, a copy whereof is kept on record. 4. In so far as the petitioner’s other grievance relating to the insufficiency and inadequacy of the 2 Bank, where he is posted, are considered to be not pressed in so far as this writ petition is concerned. 5. The petitioner will be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum with his grievance, if any. 6. The respondent Bank refutes such allegations which are already documented, copies whereof are kept on record. 7. However, without going into these issues the writ petition is disposed of recording that the service of the petitioner has been confirmed and the petitioner will not be considered as a Probationary Officer any further. 8. Since no affidavits have been called for, the allegations contained in the writ petition and the supplementary affidavit are deemed to have been denied. 9. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon usual undertakings. (Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)