WP(C) 2155/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B D AGARWAL By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the Communication No. AGVB/ VIG/ 235/01/2010-11 dated, 28.02.2011, whereby the petitioner is directed to arrange recovery of ‘ 11, 12, 305.75 (Rupees eleven lakh twelve thousand three hundred five and seventy five paise), with interest within 15th of March 2011. Heard Sri M Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri S Dutta, learned counsel for the respondents. Sri Sarma submitted that the aforesaid order has been passed wit hout giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. According to the learn ed counsel, the alleged misappropriation took place due to lack of maintaining r econciliation of savings accounts by the bank account holders. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the aforesaid irregularity were committed by the predecessor in office and not during the time when the petitioner was looki ng after the savings accounts at Niz-Baghmari Branch. With regard to the impugned order, Sri Dutta, learned counsel, s ubmitted that the Communication dated 28.02.2011, may be treated by the petition er as a notice and not as a final order. In view of the aforesaid statements of the learned counsel for t he respondent, the writ petition is disposed of with an observation that the imp ugned Communication dated 28.02.2011, shall be treated as a notice and the petit ioner is at liberty to file his reply to the Bank. This shall be done within a p eriod of 4 (four) weeks from today. In the meanwhile, the petitioner shall be at liberty to verify the relevant documents in the Bank. Thereafter, the Bank shal l proceed further in accordance with the established procedure. Needless to ment ion here that till the final decision is taken by the Bank, the Bank shall not i nsist for recovery of the money as aforesaid.