Md. Nasir Ahmad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.419 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 11167 of 2006 ======================================================

1. Md. Nasir Ahmad Son of Hasnu Tor, Resident of Mohalla - Sidkichak, P.O. - Sandesh and District - Bhojpur.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through Anjani Kumar Sinha, the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna.

2. Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Son of Not Known, Chairman Bihar State Cooperative Marketing Union Ltd., Biscomaun Bhawan, Patna.

3. Shatrughan Prasad Choudhary, Son of Not Known, Managing Director, Bihar State Co-operative Marketing Union Ltd., Biscomaun Bhawan, Patna.

4. Haridayal Chaudhary, Son of Late Dukh Haran Chaudhary Chief of Accounts, Bihar State Co-operative Marketing Union Ltd. Biscomaun Bhawan, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mohammed Abu Haidar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anjani Kumar, AAG-6 For the Respondents-Biscomaun: Mr. Amar Nath Das ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ) 14-01-2016 Heard Mr. Md. Abu Haidar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and Mr. Anjani Kumar, learned Additional Advocate General No. 6, appearing for the State. Heard also Mr. Amar Nath Deo, learned counsel for the opposite party, Biscomaun.

The respondents/opposite parties have submitted that

Patna High Court MJC No.419 of 2015 (2) dt.14-01-2016 they have complied with the directions give by the order, dated 08.09.2009, passed, in C.W.J.C.No. 11167 of 2006 and analogous cases by a Full Bench of this Court in respect of admissible salary to the petitioner due from 1996.

Having perused the reply, which has been filed by the respondents/opposite parties in M.J.C.No. 42 of 2005, disposed of, on 14.01.2016, we are of the view that there is no deliberate and willful disobedience of the directions given by the order, dated 08.09.2009.

With the above observations and directions, these contempt proceedings are closed and shall accordingly stand disposed of.

It shall remain open to the petitioners to take recourse to such provision of law as may be permissible if they still feel aggrieved by the exercise, which has been undertaken by the respondents/opposite parties.

(I.A. Ansari, ACJ) (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J) (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) A.I./- U