Ram Eshwar Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2310 of 2017 In C. REV. 111 of 2017 ====================================================== Ram Eshwar Prasad, son of Late Ram Das Prasad, Resident of Mohalla Munna Chak, Police Station - Patrakar Nagar, Patna, District - Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Sudhir Kumar, the Principal Secretary, Agriculture Department, Bihar, Patna.

3. Prabhu Ram, the Additional Secretary, Agriculture Department, Bihar, Patna.

4. Arbinder Singh, Director Horticulture, Department of Agriculure, Bihar, Patna.

5. E.L.N. Bala Prasad, the Departmental Enquiry Commissioner -cumConducting Officer, Bihar, Patna.

6. Sudama Mahto, the then District Agriculture Officer, Gaya-cum-the Presenting Officer.

7. Umesh Kumar Chaudhary, Joint Director (Agronomy), Patna Division, Department of Agriculture, Bihar, Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG- 13 Mr. Ravi Kumar, AC to AAG-13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 20-12-2017 Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh, learned Additional Advocate General No.13 for the State. Prima-facie this contempt application is not maintainable because the writ petition was disposed of to enable the petitioner to avail of the statutory remedy of appeal available to him. The order nowhere issued direction to the State which required compliance. To that extent the contempt is

Patna High Court MJC No.2310 of 2017 (2) dt.20-12-2017 not even maintainable.

However, responding to the matter a show cause is filed enclosing an order bearing Memo No.959 dated 25.9.2017 rejecting his review.

On either ground the contempt application does not survive and is disposed of accordingly. The petitioner, if so advised, may question the order passed on the review before the appropriate forum by filing an appropriate application. (Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/- U