← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/1877/1999disposed

Gopi Kant Jha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-09-05The Chief Justice,Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1877 of 1999 ====================================================== Gopi Kant Jha, son of Late Kamala Kant Jha, an Assistant Teacher of Project Indu Girls High School, Sasaula Sabha (Mejarganj) Police StationMejarganj, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Sushma Singh, wife name not known, the Secretary (Primary and Secondary Education), Secondary, Primary and Adult Education Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

3. Sri Mahendra Kumar, son of name not known, the Director (Secondary Education), Secondary, Primary and Adult Education Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Kumar Pandey, Advocate Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. (Gp5) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 05-09-2017 Inter alia contending that an order passed on 03.03.1994 in C.W.J.C. No. 7424 of 1992 has not been complied with, this application has been filed for initiating action for contempt.

More than 18 years have passed since the application was filed and till date no action has been taken in the matter.

While taking cognizance in the matter on 27.06.2001, the petitioner was granted liberty to mention before

Patna High Court MJC No.1877 of 1999 (5) dt.05-09-2017 2/2 the Court for disposal after SLP (Civil) Nos. 6614-6663 of 2000 is decided by the Supreme Court.

When the matter is taken up today, no one appears for the petitioner to state as to what happened in the aforesaid SLP.

Considering the aforesaid, now we are not inclined to proceed further in the matter and take any action in the matter.

If any grievance survives to the petitioner after SLP is decided by the Supreme Court, the petitioner is granted liberty to proceed afresh in accordance with law. With the aforesaid liberty, this application stands disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Uday/- U