Patna High CourtMJC/426/2014disposed

Monazir Hussain v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-10-13The Chief Justice2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.426 of 2014 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2579 of 2013 =========================================================== Monazir Hussain Son Of Late Manjurul Haque R/O Vill. - Chakjadu, P.S. - Baligaun, District - Vaishali .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Shree Amitav Verma, The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Bihar, Patna

3. Shree Lokesh Kumar Singh, The Director, Panchayat Raj Department, Bihar, Patna

4. Shree Uma Shankar Mandal, The Deputy Development Commissioner-CumChief Executive Officer, District Board (Zila Parishad), Vaishali At Hazipur .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. PRAMOD KUMAR For the Respondent/s : Mr. NEELU AGRWAL =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 13-10-2017 The only direction issued in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2579 of 2013 passed on 17.09.2013 was to decide the representation of the petitioner.

From the show cause filed by the Zila Parishad, it is seen that considering the claim of the petitioner, difference in arrear of salary from 01.01.1984 to 02.01.1988 and further difference between 5th pay commission and 6th pay commission have been paid to the petitioner. From the show cause, it is seen that instead of passing order on the representations, certain arrears of salary has been

Patna High Court MJC No.426 of 2014 dt.13-10-2017 2/2 paid to the petitioner, which according to the petitioner, is the only action required to be taken.

That being so, in view of the fact that direction was only to consider and take a decision on the representation and as a consequence thereof, monetary benefits have been paid to the petitioner, it is not a fit case where action for contempt can be initiated. In case the petitioner has any grievance still subsisting, he may challenge the same afresh in accordance with law. Finding no case made out for initiating action for contempt, the application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty to the petitioner.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) Shageer/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 19/10/2017 Transmission Date NA