The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, v. Bijaynand Jha,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1362 of 2016 ====================================================== 1.

The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Superintending Engineer Electric Circle, Patna Bihar. 3.

The Executive Engineer Electric Supply Division, Patna, Rural Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Executive Engineer (Electrical) Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Bijaynand Jha, Son of Late Rajendra Jha, resident of Village- Parmanandpur, P.S. Nath Nagar, District- Bhagalpur.

2.

The State of Bihar through Secretary, Energy, Bihar, Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Vijay Kumar Verma, Advocate Mr. Akhileshwar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 09-12-2021 The instant petition has been filed for modification of the part of the order dated 03.11.2015, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1477 of 2012, titled as Bijayanand Jha Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. and other analogous cases.

Vide common order dated 3rd of November, 2015, a bunch of writ petitions were disposed of, whereby it was left open for the parties to approach the respondents by way of representation to be made to the Chairman of the Bihar Power Holding Company Limited.

Record revels that in a Contempt Petition being

Patna High Court MJC No.1362 of 2016 dt.09-12-2021 2/2 M.J.C. No. 811 of 2016, titled as Bijayanand Jha Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors., a statement was made that the said order stands complied with. To similar effect i.e. another Contempt Petition No. 1321 of 2016, titled as Pramod Kumar Kanth Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. was filed, whereby also the petition stood dismissed for compliance of the order.

Through the instant petition, the parties, who are respondents in the main matter, seek modification in that part of the order whereby the Court, instead of directing the petitioners, had asked the respondents to file a representation. Apparently, the error is typographical in nature and the order is clarified to that extent.

The application stands disposed of.

(Sanjay Karol, CJ) Amrendra/PKP AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 10.12.2021 Transmission Date