Patna High CourtMJC/97/2015disposed

Pramod Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-05-25Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

Patna High Court MJC No.97 of 2015 dt.25-05-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.97 of 2015 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9966 of 2012 =========================================================== Pramod Prasad Singh, son of Late Bachcha Prasad, resident of village and P.O.- Nayagaon, Police Station- Parbatta in the district of Khagaria. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Building Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, namely, Sri Chanchal Kumar, son of not known to the petitioner.

2. The Executive Engineer, Building Construction Department, Building Division, Samastipur, namely, Sri Navin Kumar, son of not known to the petitioner.

3. The Superintending Engineer, Building Construction Department, Circle Office, Laheriasarai, Darbhanga, namely, Niranjan Prasad Singh, son of not known to the petitioner.

4. Chief Engineer, Building Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Vishwasaraiya Bhawan, North Block, Patna, namely, Sri Ramadhar Ram, son of not known to the petitioner.

.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Akhileshwar Prasad Singh, Sr. Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. N. Nasrul Hoda Khan, S.C.-1 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 25-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, payment has already been made, but only question has been raised about the interest.

Patna High Court MJC No.97 of 2015 dt.25-05-2017 Learned counsel for the State submits that as and when they received the money, the same has been paid to the petitioner. He further submits that the Vice-Chancellor and Registrar of the University have not been made party and in view of the fact that the payment has been made, no case of contempt is made out. In such view of the matter, this contempt application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent authority, if anything is left out. If the petitioner approaches, the authority concerned shall act in accordance with law.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N/A.

Uploading Date 29.05.2017 Transmission Date N/A.