IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12663 of 2009 SURESH SHUKLA, SON OF SRI RAM NAGINA SHUKLA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND POST OFFICE FATHEHPUR, P.S. MALSALAMI, DISTRICT PATNA. Versus 1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA THROUGH THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, WEST GANDHI MAIDAN, PATNA-800001. 2. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, REGION-II, ZONAL OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA. 3. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, REGION-II, STATE BANK OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, PATNA. ----------- 04. 15.07.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State Bank of India(hereinafter referred to as the Bank). 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the instruction of the Bank dated 29.2.2008, Annexure-2, whereunder the Bank has informed the petitioner that excess amount of Rs.1,09,030/- has been paid to him towards his provident fund dues. Counsel for the petitioner submits that such statement of the Bank is incorrect as petitioner has been paid only a sum of Rs.100/- in excess in his GPF account and statement to the contrary made under letter dated 29.2.2008 is incorrect. 3. Let petitioner explain the aforesaid incorrect statement to the Branch Manager of the Bank, who has written letter dated 29.2.2008 as also explain the position that he has already cleared his housing loan account on 5.3.2008 when he deposited the remaining balance amount of Rs.304/- and such fact is evident from Annexures-5 and 6, the deposit receipt and the statement of account, wherefrom it will also appear that the Bank has adjusted the loan amount in its own account. Interim order dated 12.10.2009 passed in the instant case is vacated with observation that if petitioner is aggrieved by any action of the Bank, he is at liberty to take appropriate steps against the Bank. 4. With the observation aforesaid, the writ application is disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha,J.) - 2 -