Kamal Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15007 of 2014 ====================================================== Kamal Choudhary son of late Mithu Choudhary resident of Lohia Nagar, Kankarbagh Near Tiwary Becher, P.S. Kankarbagh, District Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The Director in Chief, Health Services, Bihar, Patna 3.

The Deputy Director, Head quarter, Directorate of Health Service, Bihar, Patna 4.

The Civil Surgeon-Cum-Chief Medical Officer, Purnia 5.

The District Tuberculosis Center, Purnia 6.

The Medical Officer, Sub-divisional Hospital, Banmankhi, Purania 7.

The Medical Officer, Addl. Primary Health Centre, Janki Nagar, Purnia ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gajendra Kumar Jha Mr. Sushil Kumar Jha For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Hitesh Suman, AC to SC 13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 15-10-2019 In compliance of order passed by the writ court in CWJC No. 6379/2006 authorities had realized their mistake and themselves withdrawn petitioner's termination and directed for his reinstatement vide order dated 26.09.2011 issued by the Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Bihar, Patna. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of order passed in the writ proceedings petitioner was also entitled to consequential benefit in the event authorities were of the opinion that his termination was mistaken and in the event, they cancelled their termination order. Order of reinstatement

Patna High Court CWJC No.15007 of 2014(2) dt.15-10-2019 2/2 however, does not grant consequential benefit. Even if the submission of counsel for the petitioner is taken to be correct there would be no occasion to issue successive direction as earlier direction was there for grant of consequential benefit in petitioner's earlier writ proceeding arising out of CWJC No. 6379/2006.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that in order to ensure compliance with direction passed in the earlier writ proceedings by the respondent-authorities, he would be filing a contempt proceedings.

In view of such submission, writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail remedy in contempt jurisdiction.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) s.hassan/- U