Patna High Court
MJC/3307/2025 of Shubham Singh Vs The Canara Bank through Mr. Satyanarayan Raju, the C.E.O., Head Office, Bangaluru on 19 August 2026
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
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
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
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
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
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