Jamunadhar Mishra v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12166 of 2008 ====================================================== Jamunadhar Mishra S/o Late Bhishamdhar Mishra, resident of Village - Sahasa, P.S. Bhagwanpur, District - Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Director General and Inspector General of Police, Main Secretariat, Patna.

3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police (Personnel) Main Secretariat, Patna.

4. The Inspector General of Police Criminal Investigation Department, Main Secretariat, Patna.

5. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Criminal Investigation Department, Main Secretariat, Patna.

6. The Superintendent of Police (C) Criminal Investigation Department, Main Secretariat, Patna.

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Pandey For the Respondent/s : Mr. (Sc29) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3.

23-09-2015 The present writ petition has been filed against an order dated 06-05-2008, contained in Memo No. 1249, issued by the respondent no. 6/Superintendent of Police (C), Criminal Investigation Deptt., whereby order dated 27th March, 2008 issued by the Deputy Inspector General of Police has been communicated intimating the petitioner regarding rejection of his claim for monetary benefit between the period 05-05-1990 to 12-03-2000. Ofcourse, the said order was passed, in view of judgment dated 27th January, 2008 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 990 of 1991 and order dated 19-07-2007 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13196 of

Patna High Court CWJC No.12166 of 2008 (3) dt.23-09-2015 2/2 2001, on perusal of order dated 19-07-2007 in C.W.J.C. No. 13196 of 2001, it appears that the respondent no. 5/Deputy Inspector General of Police has over-reached his jurisdiction. Virtually, it is a matter of contempt. In the writ jurisdiction, this issue may not be examined.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate petition. It is evident that immediately after issuance of impugned order, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present writ petition on 14-08-2008 and as such, if the petitioner files appropriate petition, it may not be considered as belatedly petitioner approached.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U