RAJKUMARI MURLIDHAR RAMCHANDANI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Vijay Patel, learned advocate for Mr. P.S. Chandra, learned advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Ayaan Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent - State and Mr. Ritesh Patadia, learned advocate appearing for the respondent No.2.

(2.) Mr. Vijay Patel, learned advocate appearing for Mr. P.S. Chandra, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the presiding officer of DRT-I, Ahmedabad is not available and the charge of DRT-I given to the Presiding Officer of DRT-II has not been extended after 31/3/2022.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Ritesh Patadia appearing for the respondent No.2 submitted that in view of the peculiar situation which has arisen due to non-handing over of the charge of the DRT-I to the Presiding Officer of the DRT-II w.e.f. 1/4/2022, under instructions from the responsible Officer of the Bank, no coercive action shall be taken by the respondent-Bank against the petitioner till either the charge of DRT-I is handed over to the Presiding Officer to the DRT-II or the Presiding Officer of the DRT-I takes the charge. It was further submitted that the respondent-bank shall also issue notice of 15 days to the petitioner before taking any action.