Umeshanand Pandit, Advocate, v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4474 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11380 of 2017 ====================================================== Umeshanand Pandit, Advocate, S/o Raj Kishore Pandit, Resident of MohallaPurandrapur, P.O.- G.P.O., Patna P.S.-Jakkanpur, District-Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The District Magistrate, Saran, Sri Subrat Kumar Sen 3.

The Sub-Divisional officer, Saran at Chapra, Sri Lokesh Mishra 4.

The Circle officer, Anchal Sadar Chapra, Sri Vijay Kumar Singh. 5.

The State Religious Trust Board, Bihar, Patna, Sri Arvind Kumar Jain 6.

The State Wkaff Board, Bihar, Patna, Md. Irshaddullah, Chairman. 7.

Brij Mohan Prasad, Son of Late Tarkeshwar Prasad 8.

Brij Bhushan Prasad, Son of Late Tarkeshwar Prasad 9.

Sanjay Prasad, Son of Late Awadh Kishore Prasad 10.

Radhe Shyam Prasad @ Ram Bhagat Prasad, Son of Late Awadh Kishore Prasad Opposite Party nos. 7 to 10 resident of Mohalla- Circle No. 15, Ward No. 18, New Bazar, in Front of Gandhi Maszid, P.S.-Bhagwan Bazar District-Saran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam, AAG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 12-12-2019 The present application has been filed for initiating a rule of contempt against the Opposite Party No.4 (respondent No.4 of the Writ application) for his willful and deliberate disobedience of the Order / Judgment dated 15.09.2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 11380 of 2017 (Umeshanand Pandit Vs. The

Patna High Court MJC No.4474 of 2018(3) dt.12-12-2019 2/2 State of Bihar & Ors.).

In view of the response/show-cause filed by the State, we find that the directions contained in the judgment dated 15.09.2017 has been complied with.

As such, we close the present proceeding reserving liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate action with regard to surviving grievances, if any.

(Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) uday/- U