IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH CWP No. 20768 of 2010 Date of decision December 12, 2011 T. N. Singla and another ....... Petitioners Versus Reserve Bank of India and another ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Mr. Anil Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Amit Jhanji, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. L. M. Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Khanna, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?No K. Kannan, J (oral). 1. At the previous date of hearing on 12.10.2011 I had recorded objections taken on behalf of the State Bank of India that the petition has been filed under the un-amended provisions of the State Bank of India Act and through the amendment the requirement of membership in the Local Board has since been omitted and the permission of Reserve Bank of India for appointing the Chairman has also been dispensed with. The writ petition has therefore, become infructuous and is disposed of as such. The petitioners will be at liberty to seek for appropriate redress, if they are still aggrieved under the amended provisions of the Act. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE December 12 , 2011 archana