You can file writ Petition in the said case. Writ Petition is maintainable against pvt organisation even when the larger public interest is involved. 

There is no lack of decision where Supreme court has clearly held that private entity can very well be amenable to writ jurisdiction if it discharges public functions. 

BCI is one such instance. 

Banking is also a public function which comes under writ jurisdiction. 

- The same decision of the Court will be implied , even the bank become a pvt.ltd , and further the Writ will not be effected by such status of bank. 

- Further , the Writ cannot be dismissed /forfeited by such changing. 

See if the writ will be forfeited then the chargesheet/charge also has to be done afresh.

Hope this helps.

Regards

1. This is an unique case for which no circular can be expected and such arguments shall have to be counter argued by your Advocate.

2. You had filed the W.P. and got the stay on the charge sheet when IDBI was a PSU.

3. The charge sheet was also issued when it was a PSU.

4. There has been a stay on the charge sheet which will prevail.

For judgement you need to contact particular lawyer 

At time of filing of writ it was PSU

Similar question relating to maintainable of a 'Writ' under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, was considered by the Supreme Court in (Federal Bank Ltd. v. Sagar Thomas). In the said case, the Supreme Court observed that a Writ Petition under Article 226of the Constitution of India may be maintained against a private body discharging public duty or positive obligation of public nature. Similar argument advanced on behalf of an employee that the Federal Bank performs public duty, in the light of the control of the Reserve Bank of India over the Banking industries, was accepted by the High Court. However, the Supreme Court, on appeal preferred by the Federal Bank Ltd., reversed such finding with the following observation:

18. From the decisions referred to above, the position that emerges is that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may be maintainable against (i) the State (Government); (ii) an authority; (iii) a statutory body; (iv) an instrumentality or agency of the State; (v) a company which is financed and owned by the State; (vi) a private body run substantially on State funding; (vii) a private body discharging public duty or positive obligation of public nature; and (viii) a person or a body under liability to discharge any function under any statute, to compel it to perform such a statutory function.

27. Such private companies would normally not be amenable to the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. But in certain circumstances a writ may issue to such private bodies or persons as there may be statutes which need to be complied with by all concerned including the private companies. F

Dear Sir,

There won't be any circular is this regard. 

However, there are a numerous of Judgments which state that a Writ Petition is maintainable even against a private body when it is discharging public functions and has some form of government control.  

A few of which are:

Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Samarak Trust and others v. V.R.Rudani and others (1989) 2 SCC 691 

Mysore Paper Mills Ltd. v. Mysore Paper Mills Officers' Association and another, (2002) 2 SCC 167

Zee Telefilms Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors., (2005) 4 SCC 649

Moreover in your case the cause of action arose when the Bank was a PSU. Therefore the Writ Petition won't be dismissed on the ground on non-maintainability. 

Hope this helps.

Best wishes.

1. The Writ does not stand forfeited as you had a cause of action on the date of filing of the Writ Petition by virtue of the fact that it was a PSU.

2. The rights and liabilities get transferred.

3. You are free to pursue the writ petition.

You Please seek the leave of Court to amend your petition before High Court and accordingly amend cause title and proceed with your original claim without disturbance in Original order of stay passed in your Petition pending before High Court.

Since the bank no more left a state, writ not maintainable.

Writ may be withdraw or dismissed being infratuous. You can challege the chargesheet in civil court now.

Status of the bank as on 07.01.2016 shall be counted for the purpose , present position has nothing to do with your grievance, only for the amendment purpose it shall be counted in the parent writ.

No help, nature of bank if changed so HC dose not have jurisdiction to pass an order.

You need to follow that writ if already filed

The writ will not become infructuous/forfeit. The same writ petition would continue with a few basic amendments. 

Please refer to the reasons mentioned in my previous answer. 

Pls proceed with the same. Judgement finding will require detailed case study of facts in specific

Rely upon judgment cited by me that proceedings should continue against bank 

At time of filing writ it was PSU subsequently LIC has taken over bank 

2) The government may seek the opinion of the law ministry on whether the now privatised IDBI Bankshould be considered a state-run financial institution, or be treated on a par with private banks as classified by the Reserve Bank of India, a senior official said.

The development comes after the Central Vigilance Commission, in response to a finance ministry query, said IDBI Bank will continue to come under the government’s vigilance oversight. Private banks do not fall under the ambit of the Vigilance Commission.

Please amend the cause title of your petition with the leave of the Court and proceed further. 

To amend the  cause title of your petition, you do not need precedence. Your interim order would be continued by the same bench or the bench which is hearing your petition. 

 The same decision of the Court will be implied , even the bank become a pvt.ltd , and further the Writ will not be effected by such status of bank. 

- Further , the Writ cannot be dismissed /forfeited by such changing. 

- Further , you can move an application for amending the Memo of parties in the said Writ .

1. As I said you can pursue the writ petition and let the HC decide it on merits.

2. No judgments are required for this.

Understand Sir forget Public or private but see process of domestic inquiry in both the places are same so in your parent writ only move an amendment application for the purpose that all.

The bank lawyer will use all tactics to nullify your petition or claim.

You may have to concentrate on your original case case alone.

It was a PSU bank then and the same status continues as far as the current cae is concerned, let the bank lawyer tell anything before court, you may follow it up properly through your own advocate as per  law.

You have filed the writ petition on some grounds, you may strongly fight your case on the same grounds and  do not get deviated for any reason.

You may await the result of the writ petition filed by you.

Why do you keep insisting on the judgments alone.

What is your advocate doing without providing the judgment that you desire to see in this regard.

You have been clearly explained the position of law in this regard.

The privatization of the bank is a subsequent development which has nothing to do with the pending writ petition.

\s|o you are easily getting diverted from the main stream hence you are getting confused without understanding the law.

In that case no judgments also would come to your  rescue.

Your writ petition is maintenable because at time of filing the writ bank was having PSU status.

Writ is also maintenable even if status of bank have changed to pvt ltd company.

1. Mention this point before the High Court praying for a direction upon the said Company not to take any adverse action against youin connection with the said charge sheet.

2. It is a fact the Company will pick up some other issue to harass you or terminate you and in that case you shall have to approach the Labour Commissioner citing the High court order and the revengeful act of your PSU Company which has been privatised. You are expected to get favourable order from the Labour Commissioner/Court.

This is the argument  most of the experts will advise you to forward. It is an unique case for which citations are not easily available.

The cause of action arose when the bank was a public sector bank and hence you writ is maintainable.

They canot dismiss you based upon the developments later in time.

This is the law. No judgment is needed for this.

Yes, it is.