‘No public interest’: Bombay HC dismisses PIL to rename Punjab National Bank, Bank of Baroda

Latest-News

A public curiosity litigation (PIL) petition searching for modifications to the names of Punjab Nationwide Financial institution and Financial institution of Baroda was dismissed by the Bombay Excessive Court docket.

'No public interest': Bombay HC dismisses PIL to rename Punjab National Bank, Bank of Baroda

The PIL was filed searching for change of names of some banks. (File photograph)

A public curiosity litigation (PIL) petition searching for modifications to the names of Punjab Nationwide Financial institution and Financial institution of Baroda was dismissed by the Bombay Excessive Court docket.

The Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice MS Karnik discovered that the problems raised within the petition didn’t include any public curiosity in anyway and proceeded to dismiss the plea.

“We’re greater than happy that there is no such thing as a semblance of public curiosity, a lot much less substantial public curiosity concerned in entertaining the PIL petition. We fail to understand as to how this PIL petition goals at redressal of real public hurt or public harm,” stated the bench.

The PIL was filed searching for a change of names of some banks.

The petition was filed by a petitioner in individual, Onkar Sharma, who claimed to be working as a Senior Inner Auditor in Punjab Nationwide Financial institution (PNB) and posted in Mumbai. It was averred that the PNB was established on Might 19, 1894, whereas the Financial institution of Baroda was established on July 20, 1908. Each banks have been initially arrange as personal sector banks however have been later nationalised in 1969.

The petitioner claimed that the identify of the banks was creating confusion for a lot of residents in distant areas they usually have been nonetheless not sure if these banks have been regional or nationwide/worldwide banks.

The petitioner, due to this fact, prayed that the phrases ‘Punjab’ and ‘Baroda’ shouldn’t be used for the banks’ names.

Nevertheless, the bench stated, “In our opinion, the current PIL petition is totally misconceived.” The bench additionally opined that the petitioner “had not identified any statutory embargo prohibiting these banks from utilizing the regional identify. These are in the end issues for consideration of the administration/competent authorities of the involved banks.”

The bench checked out a Supreme Court docket judgement from 2010 which elaborated on the significance of PILs and the way the courts ought to take care of it.

The bench then stated, “We’re greater than happy that not one of the parameters set out by the Supreme Court docket within the case of the State of Uttaranchal (supra) are happy to allow us to entertain this PIL petition.”

— ENDS —

Tagged