IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1007 of 2009 RATNESH KUMAR SON OF RAJ BANSHI PRASAD SUMAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- ASADPUR SATPURA, POST-OFFICE- SATPURA, POLICE STATION- BHAGWANPUR, DISTRICT- VAISHALI………………………………….APPELLANT . Versus 1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, CORPORATE CENTRE, NARIMAN POINT,MUMBAI-400021 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, CENTRAL RECRUITMENT AND PROMOTION DEPARTMENT, THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, CORPORATE CENTRE, TULSIANI CHAMBERS, FIRST FLOOR ( WEST WING ), 212, FREE PRESS GENERAL MARG, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI-400021 3. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, WEST GANDHI MAIDAN, PATNA……800001 4. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (HRO, RECRUITMENT CELL), THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, 8TH FLOOR WEST GANDHI MAIDAN, PATNA- 800001……………………………………… RESPONDENTS. ----------- 4 15-3-2010 Heard the parties. By a common judgment and order dated 13-5-2009 writ petitions of the appellant Ratnesh Kumar and those of Praveen Kumar and Mukesh Kumar Singh were dismissed by the writ court. The Letters Patent Appeal preferred by Praveen Kumar and Mukesh Kumar Singh have been subsequently dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court by order passed on 22nd December, 2009 to which one of us (Shiva Kirti Singh,J) was a party. That judgment, has been appended as Annexure-A of the counter-affidavit filed by the Bank. The facts and issues are identical and hence following the judgment of the Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 956 of 2009 and other analogous cases, this Letters Patent Appeal is also dismissed. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has received information that Praveen Kumar has preferred an appeal before the Apex Court against 2 Naresh the judgment and order contained in annexure- A to the counter- affidavit dated 22nd December, 2009. He further submits that appellant due to weak financial status, is not in a position to approach the Apex Court and, hence, it may be observed that his case shall also be governed by the judgment that may be rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Praveen Kumar ( L.P.A. No.956 of 2009 dismissed on 22nd December, 2009). The aforesaid prayer appears to be reasonable. Hence,it is observed that this order of dismissal of appeal shall not stand in the way of the appellant being entitled to same treatment in the matter in controversy as may be given to Praveen Kumar as per judgment of the Apex Court which may be rendered in future. ( Shiva Kirti Singh,J) ( Gopal Prasad, J) 3 Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)