IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16016 of 2010 1. TEJNARAYAN YADAV S/O LATE RAMNARAYAN YADAV @ RAMKHALABAN YADAV R/O VILL.- MADHURA UTTAR, P.S.- NARPATGANJ, DISTT.- ARARIA .......Petitioner Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI 2. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, NARIMAN POINT, BOMBAY 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE, PURNIA 5. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, CHANDA BRANCH, NARPATGANJ, DISTT.- ARARIA .........Respondents ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Binod Kumar Yadav, advocate For the State Bank of India: Mr. Kaushalendra Kr. Sinha, advocate -------- 11 17-05-2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State Bank of India. This writ petition has been filed by way of Public Interest Litigation. The petitioner has questioned the decision of State Bank of India to shift its branch at village Chanda to another village, Pachgachiya at a distance of about 3 kilometers from Chanda. According to leaned counsel for the petitioner the shifting will cause hardship to about 400 account holders. Learned counsel for the Bank on the other hand submits that larger interest of the public as well as availability of infrastructure at the other place has prompted the bank to shift its branch and the existing 2 customers can cover the distance to avail the bank facility at the Pachgachiya chowk. He has further submitted that in deference to the order of this court passed on 29-11-2010, the bank has considered the possible inconvenience of the existing customers of Chanda branch and has decided to provide a Customers Service Point (CSP) and the facilities of such Point are indicated in the letter dated 16-3-2011 annexed as Annexure- K to I.A. no. 2777/2011. There is no law restraining respondent bank from opening, closing or shifting its branch, at least in the rural area concerned. In such matters, it is difficult to decide whether public interest will be served by restraining the bank or by permitting it to shift its branch at a place where the infrastructure is said to be better. Hence, we do not find it a fit case for interference. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of. It goes without saying that since the bank has decided to provide CSP at Chanda, they are expected to continue with the said service. The cost of Rs. 5,00/- imposed upon the bank 3 by our order dated 13-5-2011 must be deposited within two weeks from today with the Patna High Court Legal Services Committee, failing which this matter should be listed “for orders” for realization of the cost. BKS/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)