^ ^lMiilE'^ ?r^^.'^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT_QFLCHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.fQNO. 3&30 /2010(S.B.\ PETITIONER ^^ ^^ ^^v ^M"^) J>./'C7-0^ ^v ^ .^ f' H.P. Chandra, S/o Shri Sohan Lal Chandra, aged about 52 years, R/o Village Bhothidih, Post Khujrani, Tahsil 85 Police station Jaijaipur, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) VERSUS Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank Through - Branch Manager, Jaijaipur, Distt. Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA . ^"^" / ^'' ,.<f / v^// ^ RESPONDENT ^ HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR WRiT PETITiON (CJ N0. 3890 OF 2010 Petitioner H.P.Chandra Versus Respondent Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank WRIT PETiTiON UNDER ARTiCLE 225 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB : Hon'ble Mr. Satlsh K. Agnihotri, J.) Present:- Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on 28th day of July, 2010) 1. The petitioner impugns the intimation-cum-notice dated 28/4/2010 On the groynd that the initiai installment fixed by the Bank have been changed by the Bank. 2. On query asto whether reply to the notice has been submitted, Searned counsei submitsthat repiythough has been submitted, but not accepted by the Bank. There is no document in support of such statement that repiy has been filed except the self-same statement and averments made in Para 8.6. As no document is on record, it cannot be heid that reply wassent and not considered. 3. Accordingiy; the petition is dismissed as being pre-mature, however, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to fi!e repiy of the intimation-cum-notice dated 28/4/2010. It Is expected that the Bank shali examine the reply and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ashok