IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1788 OF 2001 State Bank of India .....Petitioner V/s. Union of India & Ors. ..... Respondents. Mr.Harihar Bhave a/w Ms.Manisha Pant i/by Bhave & Co., for the petitioner Mr.D.A.Nalawade, Govt. Pleader, for the State. Ms.Trupti Purohit, for the B.M.C. CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR & R.M.SAVANT, JJ. DATE : JUNE 11, 2009 P.C. 1. The petitioner is a Nationalized Bank. By way of this petition, challenge is made by the bank in connection with the action of the respondents for sending the employees of the bank for Census work. It is the say of the petitioner that the bank is already having shortage of staff and it is difficult for them to depute large number of employees for the said work. It is also the say of the petitioner that they are not the local authority and therefore, the respondents could not have issued directions in this behalf. On 27-03-2001, the Division Bench of this Court has passed the following order : - “Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Rule. Respondents waive service. Hearing of the petition is expedited. Pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, criminal prosecution launched against the Manager of the petitioner bank is stayed. The parties and the authorities to act on the ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the Personal Secretary of this Court”. 2 2. Today, at the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the Census work is over since long, the main prayer made in the petition regarding sending the staff of the petitioner has become infructous. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that now the respondents should not proceed further to take criminal proceedings against the Manager of the Bank as at the relevant time, criminal proceedings were initiated against the Managers of the petitioner’s Bank. The learned Govt. Pleader states that so far as the grievance regarding sending of the staff of the petitioner’s bank for the Census work has become infructous and in future if any, such notification/directions is issued by the Government, the petitioner can take appropriate remedy as per the law. In our view, now there is no question of complying with the directions of the Government as the prayer made in the petition has become infructous. In our view, this is not a case in which prosecution should have been initiated against the manager of the petitioner’s bank. We therefore, direct that the prosecution if any, pending against the Manager/employees of the petitioner’s bank is quashed, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive action in this behalf against the officers of the petitioner-bank. In view of what is stated above, the petition is disposed of as having become infructous. Rule discharged. ( R.M.SAVANT, J. ) (P.B.MAJMUDAR, J.)