Madhukar v. Mr. Sanjeev Hansh, The Principal Secretary, Department Of Energy

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.159 of 2024 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18322 of 2015 ====================================================== Madhukar son of Sri Jawahar Lal, resident of Shivaji Nagar (Saichak), P.O.- Beur, Via-Anishabad and P.S.-Beur, District-Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Mr. Sanjeev Hansh, the Principal Secretary, Department of Energy Government of Bihar, 9 Daroga Roy Path, Patna-800001. 2.

Mr. Sanjeev Hansh, the Chairman, Bihar State Hydro Electric Power Corporation, Sone Bhawan, 2nd Floor, B.C. Patel Marg, Patna-800001. 3.

Mr. Mahendra Kumar, The Managing Director, Bihar State Hydro Electric Power Corporation, Sone Bhawan, 2nd Floor, B.C. Patel Marg, Patna800001. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pranav Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Subhash Pd. Singh, GA-3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 12-12-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The present application has been preferred for initiation of the proceedings under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the opposite parties for their wilful and deliberate disobedience shown in noncompliance with the judgment dated 01.09.2023 passed in CWJC No. 18322 of 2015 passed by this Court.

3. Mr. Mritunjay Kumar has taken this Court to paragraph nos. 21 and 22 of the show cause which read as follows:

Patna High Court MJC No.159 of 2024(3) dt.12-12-2025 2/3

21. That it is humbly stated and submitted that in absence of any of provision/service conditions for payment any salary/emoluments/allowance to the employees of Corporation serving on contract basis during the period when his/their service on contract is stayed/kept in abeyance as is the case of the petitioner when his service on contract was stayed/suspended/kept in abeyance vide order dated 30.10.2012 and said order dated 30.10.2012 having been set aside vide order dated 24.06.2014, the petitioner's status remained as contractual employee even after order dated 24.06.2014, petitioner is not entitled for any salary/emoluments/allowance for the said period between November, 2012 to June, 2014, however, as a consequence of order dated 24.06.2014, petitioner was reinstated in service on contract basis.

22. That in the facts and circumstances mentioned above, specially taking into consideration the order under Memo No. 655 dated 06.10.2020 (AnnexureR/L), the order of the Hon'ble Court has been complied with.

4. In that background, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner can challenge the said decision of the opposite

Patna High Court MJC No.159 of 2024(3) dt.12-12-2025 3/3 party.

5. With the aforesaid observation, the MJC No. 159 of 2024 is disposed of.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U