Gauri Shankar Azad v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Department Of Urban Development Govt. Of Bihar Pa

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2499 of 2017 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 795 of 2012 ====================================================== Gauri Shankar Azad, aged 38 years, S/o Late Mohan Prasad Sharma, Resident of Mohalla- Azad Sales Shashi Complex, Exhibition Road, P.S.- Gandhi Maidan, Distt- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Department of Urban Development Govt. of Bihar Patna, Namely Chaytanya Prasad, S/o not known.

2. The Divisional Commissioner Darbhanga Division Darbhanga Division Darbhanga namely R.K. Khandaywal, S/o not knwon.

3. The District Magistrate Darbhanga namely Chandrashekhar Singh, S/o not known.

4. The Darbhanga Municipal Corporation through the Municipal Commissioner Darbhanga namely Nagendra Kumar Singh, S/o not known.

5. The Municipal Commissioner, Darbhanga Municipal Corporation namely Nagendra Kumar Singh, S/o not known.

.... .... Opp.Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Sharma For the Respondent/s : Mr. Yogendra Prasad Sinha - Aag 7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 07-03-2018 The writ petition was disposed of with the direction to the Municipal Commissioner to consider the claim of the petitioner for payment towards the supplies made by him to the Corporation and to dispose of the same by a speaking order. It was also mentioned that the admissible dues be paid within three months while those not found admissible be disposed of by a speaking order.

A show cause is filed and it is stated at paragraphs 6 to 8 that the claim of the petitioner was considered and has been

Patna High Court MJC No.2499 of 2017 (3) dt.07-03-2018 disposed of by the Municipal Commissioner, Darbhanga Municipal Corporation vide order passed on 6.1.2018 and an amount of Rs.15,27,852/- was found admissible to the petitioner after deduction of the taxes which has been paid and has also been received by the petitioner.

Mr. Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, disputes the quantum but since the quantum is explained by the Municipal Commissioner in the order placed at Annexure 'A' to the show cause, in case the petitioner is not satisfied therewith, then the forum would be otherwise than in a contempt jurisdiction and the petitioner, if so advised, can take recourse to the same. For the present no contempt is made out.

The contempt application is disposed of with the liberty aforementioned.

(Jyoti Saran, J) Surendra/- U