IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1782 of 2010 SUBHASH CHANDRA DAS S/O SRI MUKUND LAL DAS R/O VILL & PO- PARSHAUNI FARM, P.S CHAUTARWA, DISTT- WEST CHAMPARAN (BETTIAH) Versus 1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA LOACAL HEAD OFFICE, JUDGES COURT ROAD, PATNA THROUGH ITS CHIEF MANAGER 2. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE JUDGES COURT ROAD, PATNA 3. THE GENERAL MANGER (OPERATION) STATE BANK OF INDIA, JUDGES COURT ROAD, PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUZAFFARPUR, CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR 5. THE REGIONAL MANAGER (ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER) REGION-5 AND APPOINTING AUTHORITY, STATE BANK OF INDIA, AADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, MUZAFFARPUR 6. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, SAHADATPUR, PO & P.S- SAHADATPUR, DISTT- WEST CHAMPARAN (BETTIAH) ----------- 06. 12.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State Bank of India(hereinafter referred to as the Bank). 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the final notice dated 18.3.2009, Annexure-1, whereunder he has been directed to voluntarily retire from the service of the Bank with effect from 18.3.2009. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the aforesaid final notice is contrary to the request of the petitioner contained in letter dated 16.9.2008, Annexure-4, whereunder he requested the Assistant General Manager, Region-V, Muzaffarpur to consider his application for grant of medical leave as he suffered burn injuries in both of his legs and the wound had become infected as also he suffered chronic low back pain but the request of the petitioner for grant of medical leave was rejected by the 2 authorities of the Bank in most unreasonable manner ignoring the certificate and prescription report of the doctor attending on the petitioner. 3. Let petitioner challenge the contents of the final notice dated 18.3.2009, Annexure-1 by filing appeal on the ground that the same has been issued without considering the ailment of the petitioner as is evident from Annexure-4 series. After exhausting alternative remedy petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court for redressal of his grievance raised in this application. 4. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)