Meera Devi @ Meera Srivastava v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.204 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12280 of 2009 ====================================================== Meera Devi @ Meera Srivastava Late Rama Shankar Lal Srivastava Resident at F/47, Peoples' Co-operative Colony, Kankarbag, Police StationKankarbag, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar and Ors Bihar 2.

Sri Avinash Kumar Srivastava, The Secretary, Department of Food and Consumer Protection, Government of Bihar, Patna 3.

Sri Dinesh Kumar, The Director, Consumer Protection Directorate, Department of Food and Consumer Protection, Government of Bihar, Patna 4.

Sri Pradeep Kumar, Bihar State Food and Supplies Corporation Limited through its Managing Director, Sone Bhawan, 5th Floor, Birchand Patel Path, Patna-1 5.

Sri Pradeep Kumar, The Managing Director, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Sone Bhawan, 5th Floor, Birchand Patel Path, Patna-1 6.

Sri Kumar Sanjay, The Chief of Administration, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporatio Limited, Sone Bhawan, 5th Floor, Birchand Patel Path, Patna-1 7.

Sri Kumar Sanjay, The Chief of Claim, Headquarter, Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Sone Bhawan, 5th Floor, Birchand Patel Path, Patna-1 ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Uday Narayan Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Vishwambhar Prasad, AC to AAG-5 Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-11-2024 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing on behalf of B.S.F.C and learned AC to AAG5. 2.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the instant contempt application has been

Patna High Court MJC No.204 of 2019(13) dt.19-11-2024 2/3 filed for initiating a proceeding of contempt against the opposite parties for their willful and deliberate violation of the order dated 19-1-2018 in CWJC No. 12280 of 2009.

3.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that the entire pensionary benefit of the husband of the petitioner has been paid to the petitioner during pendency of the writ application itself, the said submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State is not disputed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 4.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of BSFC submits that from perusal of the order dated 19-1-2018 in CWJC No. 12280 of 2009, it would manifest that the same recorded that even the husband of the petitioner was owing some amount to the Corporation, whereas even the Corporation was owing an amount of Rs. 1,38,389/- as such the Court had directed while disposing of the CWJC No. 12280 of 2009 that after adjusting the amount which the husband of the petitioner owed to the Corporation, the Corporation shall pay the rest of the amount. 5.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of BSFC submits that the Corporation from Rs. 1,38,389/- adjusted an amount of Rs. 1,08,000/- which the husband of the petitioner owed and paid rest of the amount, i.e., Rs. 30,000/- along with

Patna High Court MJC No.204 of 2019(13) dt.19-11-2024 3/3 interest as such the Corporation paid an amount of Rs. 84 thousand and odd to the petitioner.

6.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner does not dispute the said submission, but then submits that the Corporation be directed to supply a detailed calculation chart.

7.

The Court is not persuaded by the submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 8.

In view of the submission made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State and BSFC, the Court is not inclined to entertain the contempt application. 9.

Accordingly, the instant contempt application is dismissed.

10.

However, if the petitioner is still aggrieved by the act of the Corporation, in that event, the petitioner can seek her remedy available in law, in accordance with law. (Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U