K.M.Syed Mohamed, v. The Banking Ombudsman,

ORDER Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the relief sought for in the writ petition has become infructuous. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.

¶2Recording the same, this writ petition is closed as no further order is required. No costs.

06.06.2023 ogy NCC : Yes / No. Index : Yes / No. Internet : Yes / No. To

¶1The Banking Ombudsman, Reserve Bank of India, Fort Glacis, Chennai – 600 001.

¶2The Regional Manager, Union Bank of India, P.T.Rajan Road, Narimedu, Madurai – 625 002.

¶3The Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Karaiyur Branch, 60-A, Manaparai Road, Karaiyur, Ponnamaravathy Taluk, Pudukottai District.

B.PUGALENDHI, J. ogy

06.06.2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06.06.2023 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI K.M.Syed Mohamed ... Petitioner versus 1. The Banking Ombudsman, Reserve Bank of India, Fort Glacis, Chennai – 600 001. 2. The Regional Manager, Union Bank of India, P.T.Rajan Road, Narimedu, Madurai – 625 002. 3. The Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Karaiyur Branch, 60-A, Manaparai Road, Karaiyur, Ponnamaravathy Taluk, Pudukottai District. ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 28.07.2016 and to pass suitable order on merits within a specific period to be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.Babu Rajendran For Respondents : Mr.N.Dilipkumar