Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 2183 (MAD)

S. Gunasekar v. State Bank of India, Rep. by its Disciplinary Authority

2014-07-18

R.S.RAMANATHAN

body2014
Judgment 1. Though the petitioner challenges the order, dated 07.07.2014, passed by the third respondent, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has submitted replies, dated 10.07.2014 and 11.07.2014, to the impugned order, dated 07.07.2014, and the petitioner would be satisfied, if the third respondent is directed to consider the said replies and pass appropriate orders within a specified time. The learned counsel also prayed for granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge the impugned order, dated 07.07.2014. 2. Considering the limited prayer, now sought for, the Writ Petition is disposed, by directing the third respondent to consider the replies, dated 10.07.2014 and 11.07.2014, and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is also at liberty to challenge the order, dated 07.07.2014, impugned herein. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P. is closed.