Lalbabu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.866 of 2020 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13428 of 2006 ====================================================== 1.

Lalbabu Kumar son of Late Rajendra Prasad Sah resident of VillageAuraiya Shiv Tola, P.O. Auraiya, Police Station- Bettiah Muffasil, BlockChanpattiya, District- West Champaran at Bettiah. 2.

Rambabu Kumar Sah son of Late Rajendra Prasad Sah resident of VillageAuraiya Shiv Tola, P.O. Auraiya, Police Station- Bettiah Muffasil, BlockChanpattiya, District- West Champaran at Bettiah. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Amrit Lal Meena the Secretary, Department of Rural Development, Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

Dr. Chandra Shekhar Sinha the Director, Directorate of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

Dr. Nilesh Ramchandra Deore the District Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah.

5.

Vinod Kumar Rajak, the District Panchayat Officer, West Champaran at Bettiah.

6.

Chandan Chauhan the Sub- Divisional Officer Narkatiyaganj SubDivisional, District- West Champaran at Bettiah. 7.

Rashmi Kumari the Block Development Officer Sikta, District- West Champaran at Bettiah.

8.

Basant Kumar Singh the Block Development Officer, Bettiah Sadar, District- West Champaran at Bettiah.

9.

Ashok Kumar Pandey the Gram Panchayat Officer Sugha Bhawanipur, Block- Sikta, District- West Champaran at Bettiah. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sumit Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pushkar Narain Shahi (Aag 6) Mr.Manish Kumar, AC to AAG-6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 12-01-2024

1. The learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that the order of this Court dated 09.08.2018, passed in CWJC No.13428 of 2006 has stood complied with inasmuch as

Patna High Court MJC No.866 of 2020(4) dt.12-01-2024 2/2 the petitioners have already been paid the entire consequential benefits to the tune of Rs.21,20,561, hence nothing survives for consideration in the present petition.

2. The aforesaid factual aspect of the matter has not been controverted by the learned counsel for the petitioners inasmuch as no rejoinder affidavit has been filed to the showcause, filed on behalf of the contemnors.

3. Accordingly, the present contempt petition stands dismissed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Saurav/- U