DIGAMBAR BEHERA vs THE MANAGING DIRECTOR AND C.E.O., BANK OF BARODA, HEAD OFFICE BARODA CORPORATE CENTRE AND OTHERS — MAT/764/2026
Case under No Act Section NA. Next hearing: 10th June 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA0195082026
Filing Number
MAT/771/2026
Filing Date
23-Apr-2026
Registration No
MAT/764/2026
Registration Date
24-Apr-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Justice Madhuresh Prasad , Hon'ble Justice Prasenjit Biswas
Coram
Hon'ble Justice Madhuresh Prasad , Hon'ble Justice Prasenjit Biswas
Bench Type
Division Bench
Category
GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )
Sub-Category
Residuary ( 26 )
Judicial Branch
STAMP REPORTER (SR) SECTION
Last updated 29-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.DIGAMBAR BEHERA
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE MANAGING DIRECTOR AND C.E.O., BANK OF BARODA, HEAD OFFICE BARODA CORPORATE CENTRE AND OTHERS
Case History
-
10-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
10-Jun-2026
Group - VI
Hon'ble Justice Madhuresh Prasad , Hon'ble Justice Prasenjit Biswas
-
19-May-2026
Hon'ble Justice Madhuresh Prasad,hon'ble Justice Prasenjit BiswasView PDF
Summary of MAT/764/2026 Digambar Behera appealed against a Single Judge's order regarding his promotion at Bank of Baroda. He claims the bank wrongfully withheld his promotion to D.G.M Scale VI despite a 2015 DPC finding him fit for Scale V promotion. The appellant argued the Single Judge failed to address his consequential entitlement to Scale VI promotion. The court adjourned the matter to 10th June 2026, directing the appellant to produce relevant service rules and respondents to be served notice, to determine qualification requirements and the effect of a 2016 punishment on his promotion eligibility. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
04-May-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
23-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. MAT/764/2026
Summary of MAT/764/2026 Digambar Behera appealed against a Single Judge's order regarding his promotion at Bank of Baroda. He claims the bank wrongfully withheld his promotion to D.G.M Scale VI despite a 2015 DPC finding him fit for Scale V promotion. The appellant argued the Single Judge failed to address his consequential entitlement to Scale VI promotion. The court adjourned the matter to 10th June 2026, directing the appellant to produce relevant service rules and respondents to be served notice, to determine qualification requirements and the effect of a 2016 punishment on his promotion eligibility. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts