← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/607/2025dismissed

Ankit Kumar v. The Union Of India

2025-07-18Mr. Justice Harish Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.607 of 2025 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18148 of 2024 ====================================================== Ankit Kumar, Son of Sanjay Singh, Resident of village - Sharma, P.S. - Sharma, District- Lakhisarai (Bihar).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through the Principal Secretary, Ministry of Home, New Delhi.

2.

The Chairman, Staff Selection Commission namely Mr. S. Kishore. 3.

The Director General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force, New Delhi namely Prakash Mishra.

4.

The Inspector General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force, Patna, Bihar, Namely Ms. Annie Abraham.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Akash Shankar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. K.N. Singh, ASG Mr. Amish Kumar, CGC ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-07-2025 Heard Mr. Akash Shankar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Amish Kumar, learned Advocate for the Union of India.

2. The present application before this Court is filed for initiation of a contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for non-compliance of the order of this Court dated 02.12.2024 passed by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 18148 of 2024. A show cause affidavit is filed on behalf of the opposite parties. It is informed to this Court that in the light of the order of this Court, the petitioner made a detailed representation before the

Patna High Court MJC No.607 of 2025(4) dt.18-07-2025 2/2 concerned authorities and the same was duly considered and finally on being found no merit in the claim of the petitioner, the same stands rejected by a reasoned and speaking order dated 14.02.2025, the copy of which is placed on record as Annexure B.

3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner is not satisfied with the order and submission has been made that the same is not in true letter and spirit of this order under contempt.

4. Having gone through the show cause and reasoned order, this Court does not find any reason to continue with the proceeding.

5. The present contempt petition stands closed.

6. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to assail the same, if so advised.

(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U