Anita Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.26 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10158 of 2016 ====================================================== Anita Devi wife of Sri Mahendra Prasad Jaiswal resident of Chandan Nagar, Gulab Bag, P.S.-Sadar, District-Purnea, proprietor of Maa Durga Rice Mill, Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar.

2.

Mr. Pankaj Kumar, the Managing Director, Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation Bihar, Patna.

3.

Mr. Pradeep Jha, District Magistrate Purnea.

4.

Mr. Suresh Prasad, the District Manager, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Purnea.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shashi Bhushan Kumar, Adv For the State :

Mr.Kamal Akhtar, AC to AAG-5 For the BSFC :

Mr. Shailendra Kr. Singh, Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 05-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the BSFC and learned counsel for the State.

2. This application was filed with a prayer for initiating contempt proceeding and for punishing the opposite parties for intentionally and deliberately not complying with the order dated 03.02.2017 passed in CWJC No. 10158 of 2016.

3. It has been brought to the notice of this Court through supplementary show cause filed on behalf of opposite party nos. 3 and 4 that the order passed in writ has been complied with and a detailed order has been passed which is

Patna High Court MJC No.26 of 2019(11) dt.05-12-2025 2/2 contained in Memo No. 9329 dated 14.11.2022. This order has been brought on record by way of Annexure-B to the said supplementary show cause. It has been stated in the supplementary show cause that this order has been passed complying with the order passed in writ after giving full opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Paragraph 6 of the said supplementary show cause is quoted hereinbelow for needful: "6. That after full opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the opposite party had passed speaking order vide memo No.

9329 dated 14.11.2022 and a copy of same sent to the petitioner and also copy served to learned Advocate."

4. In view of the fact that the order passed in writ has been complied with and a detailed order has been passed on 14.11.2022, no cause survives for pursuing with the present application and hence, it is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 14.11.2022 and audit report.

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) kiran/- U