Rakesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4916 of 2014 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12995 of 2014 ====================================================== Rakesh Kumar, S/o Late Sri Bhagwan Singh, R/o village-Bilashpur, P.S. Karagahar, District-Rohtas .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Sri Anjani Kumar Singh (The Chief Secretary Govt. of Bihar, Patna).

2. Sri B.A. Khan, the Chief Conservator of Forest Bihar, Patna

3. Sri Anjani Kumar Singh,)The Principal Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna)

4. Sri Sandeep Kumar R. Rudkal Katti, (The District Magistrate, Rohtas, Sararam)

5. Sri Amit Kumar (The Divisional Forest Officer, Rohtas, Sasaram)

6. Sri Nagendra Sharma (the Range Officer, Sasaram Forest Area DistrictRohtas at Sasaram) .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Nadim Seraj, G.P. 20 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 15-04-2015 None appears on behalf of the petitioner.

Counsel for the State is present.

This contempt application has been filed for initiating proceedings of contempt against the opposite parties for noncompliance of the order dated 7.8.2014 passed in CWJC No. 12995 of 2014.

Learned counsel for the State with reference to the show cause filed on behalf of the District Magistrate, a copy of which has been served on counsel for the petitioner on 2.3.2015, has submitted that vide order passed on 26.12.2014 by the Collector,

Patna High Court MJC No.4916 of 2014 (2) dt.15-04-2015 Rohtas, the appeal preferred by the petitioner bearing Forest Confiscation Appeal No. 90 of 2013, has been dismissed. A copy of the order is placed at Annexure-A to the show cause of the District Magistrate and learned counsel for the State with reference thereto has submitted that since the appeal of the petitioner itself has been dismissed hence there was no occasion to consider his prayer for provisional release of the vehicle. Having heard learned counsel for the State and considering the materials on record, this Court is satisfied that the order passed in the writ petition has been complied by the District Magistrate, Rohtas while passing the order dated 26.12.2014 in Forest Confiscation Appeal No. 90 of 2013 and if the petitioner is so aggrieved by the said order he may take recourse to such remedy as may be available to him in law.

The contempt application is accordingly disposed of. (Jyoti Saran, J) S.Sb/- U