Uday Kant Thakur v. The State Of Bihar Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Education

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.336 of 2024 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16538 of 2022 ====================================================== Uday Kant Thakur Son of Maheshwar Thakur, Resident of Village - Ramnagar Mahesh, Ward No. 11, P.O. - Ramnagar Mahesh PS- Srinagar, District - Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education Govt. of Bihar, Patna Mr. KK Pathak. 2.

Mr. K. K Pathak, presently posted as Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

Mr. Subodh Kumar Chaudhary, The Director Administration CumAdditional Secretary, Department of Education, Govt. of Bihar Patna. 4.

Mrs. Rekha Kumari, presently posted as the Director, Higher Education, Govt. of Bihar.

5.

The Director, Provident Fund, Govt. of Bihar, Patna, Name Ravi Kumar. 6.

Mr. Krishna Kanhaiya, The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga.

7.

Dr. Vijay Kumar Mishra, The Principal, Radha Uma Kant Sanskrit College, Sukhsena (Purnea).

8.

Pushkar Kumar, Accountant General, Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Brisketu Sharan Pandey, Advocate For the State :

Ms. Meera Singh, AC to GP-23 For the University :

Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-04-2025 Heard Mr. Brisketu Sharan Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Ms. Meera Singh, learned AC to GP-23 appearing on behalf of the State and Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel for the Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

Patna High Court MJC No.336 of 2024(9) dt.11-04-2025 2/2 petitioner submitted that full and final payment has not been made to the petitioner and seeks to file representation before the Registrar of the University for making payment of the remaining dues.

3. In view of the aforesaid submission, the present contempt petition stands disposed of.

4. It is made clear that the disposal of the present contempt petition should not mean that the Registrar of the University and the Vice-Chancellor of the University should remain indolent by not making payment of any dues, which is still required to be paid to the petitioner. In case, they delay, the petitioner is at liberty to take appropriate action against them in accordance with law.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Niraj/- U