← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/186/2019disposed

M/S Ajanta Construction Co. v. National Building Construction Limited And ORS

2025-04-18Mr. Justice Nani Tagia2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.186 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15765 of 2016 ====================================================== M/s ajanta construction co. through its authorized representative Dilip Kumar Sharma, age 52 years (Male), Son of Shri Chandradeo Sharma, Resident of Village- Achuara, P.S.- Badh, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

National Building construction limited and ors through its Chief General Manager, N.B.C.C. Limited, Maurya Tower, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Patna. 2.

Sri Braj Bhusshon not known to the petitioner Chief General Manager, N.B.C.C. Ltd, Maurya Tower, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Patna. 3.

Sri Rakesh Kumar not known to the petitioner The Additional General Manager, Zonal Head, N.B.C.C. Limited, Maurya Tower, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Patna.

4.

Sri Arun Kumar not known to the petitioner The Deputy Project Manager, N.B.C.C. Limited, Maurya Tower, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Patna. 5.

Sri Sumankant not known to the petitioner The Project Engineer, N.B.C.C. Ltd. Maurya Tower, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vinay Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr. Arun Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA ORAL ORDER 18-04-2025 This contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of order dated 03.05.2018 passed in CWJC No. 15765 of 2016, wherein, a direction was given to the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner, if the same is filed within two weeks from the date of the order.

2. Opposite parties have filed a show cause, wherein, in paragraph No. 9 it has been stated that the petitioner filed representation only on 02.06.2018 which is much beyond the

Patna High Court MJC No.186 of 2019(3) dt.18-04-2025 2/2 period of two weeks from the date of the order passed in the writ petition i.e., 03.05.2018. The learned counsel for the opposite parties contends that the petitioner did not file the representation within the time stipulated in the order passed in the writ petition, requiring any compliance by the respondents.

3. The opposite parties have also stated in the paragraph no. 10 of the show cause filed that despite the representation filed by the petitioner was beyond two weeks as stipulated in the order of the writ petition, the respondents have considered and disposed of the representation filed by the petitioner.

4. In view of the above, I find that the order dated dated 03.05.2018 passed in CWJC No. 15765 of 2016 has been duly complied with by the respondents.

5. In view of the above, this contempt application stands closed and disposed of.

(Nani Tagia, J) Siddharth Sagar/- U