IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18315 of 2010 KUNDAN KUMARI, WIFE OF SRI VIKAS KUMAR RESIDENT OF C/O PRAMOD NARAIN SINHA, H.N.112, ROAD NO.8, SRI KRISHNA NAGAR, P.S. S.K. PURI, PATNA-1. Versus 1. THE CANARA BANK THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN HEAD OFFICE, 5TH FLOOR NAVEEN COMPLEX 14, M.G. ROAD, BANGLORE-560001. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, CANARA BANK, HEAD OFFICE, 5TH FLOOR NAVEEN COMPLEX 14, M.G. ROAD, BANGLORE. 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL, HEAD OFFICE, 5TH FLOOR NAVEEN COMPLEX 14, M.G. ROAD, BANGLORE-560001. 4. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER PERSONNEL WING, HEAD OFFICE(ANNEXE), 5TH FLOOR NAVEEN COMPLEX 14, M.G. ROAD, BANGLORE-560001. 5. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF POST AND TELEGRAPH, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 6. THE CHIEF POST MASTER GENERAL, HEAD OFFICE(POST AND TELEGRAPH) BIHAR CIRCLE, PATNA. 7. THE POST MASTER, KIDWAIPURI POST OFFICE, PATNA. For the petitioner : M/s. Manjoj Kumar, Ranjan Kumar Sharma, Advocates. For the Bank : Mr. Rajan Ghoshrave, Advocate. ----------- 03. 10.11.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Canara Bank(hereinafter referred to as the Bank). 2. Petitioner was applicant for the post of Probationary Officer pursuant to advertisement published in the employment news dated 27.3.2010. In response to her application petitioner received the admit card asking her to appear in the written test to be held on 4.7.2010. She appeared in the written test and became successful but could not receive intimation for appearing in the interview which was held on 8.10.2010 3. Petitioner has filed this writ petition praying inter alia to direct the Bank to conduct fresh interview for her. In this connection, - 2 - with reference to the admit card, Anneuxre-1 it is submitted that candidates who qualify in the written examination will be intimated directly and petitioner was not intimated about the date of interview directly, as such, this court should direct the Bank to conduct separate interview for her. Perusal of admit card, Annexure-1 indicates that the roll number of the candidates who qualify in the written examination will be notified on the website of the Bank. It also says that intimation about the date of interview will be given to the candidate directly. Counsel submitted that Bank did notify about the date of interview of the petitioner on the website of the Bank but as no direct intimation sent by the Bank was received by the petitioner, this Court should direct the Bank to conduct separate interview for the petitioner. 4. Counsel for the Bank has opposed the prayer with reference to the averments made in the counter affidavit and submitted that as per stipulations made in the admit card, the Bank not only notified the roll number of the successful candidates of the written test on the website but separate intimation was also directly sent to the candidates under certificate of posting as also on the E. Mail I.D. of the candidates furnished in the application form. In support of such contention reliance is placed on Annexures-A, B to the counter affidavit, which indicate that intimation about the date of interview was given to the petitioner and other successful candidates under certificate of posting as also on E. Mail I.D. furnished by the petitioner and others. 5. Bank having taken necessary precaution for intimating - 3 - the successful candidates about the date of interview, as is evident from Annexures-A, B to the counter affidavit and Annexure-2 to the writ petition, I am satisfied that Bank did inform the petitioner about the date of interview and if petitioner has not received such information or deliberately not appeared in the interview, I am not inclined to grant any relief in the writ petition, which is dismissed. Rajesh/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)