Shiv Shambhu Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

Patna High Court MJC No.3933 of 2013 dt.02-03-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3933 of 2013 =========================================================== SHIV SHAMBHU SINGH, SON OF LATE RAM ISHWAR SINGH, R/O VILLAGE GOPALPUR, WARD NO. 9, P.S- BIKRAM, DISTT- PATNA. .... .... PETITIONER/S

VERSUS

1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COLLECTOR, PATNA.

2. SRI S.N SHRAWAN, THE COLLECTOR PATNA, DISTT- PATNA.

3. SRI SHAILENDRA KR. BHARTI, THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER PALIGANJ SUB DIVISION, PALIGANJ, DISTRICT- PATNA.

4. SRI SUDHIR KUMAR, BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BIKRAM, BLOCK BIKRAM, DISTRICT- PATNA. NULL NULL

5. SRI SANJAY KUMAR, DISTRICT RASHINING OFFICER, PATNA.

6. NEERAJ KUMAR, MUKHIYA, MAHAJPURA PANCHAYAT UNDER BLOCK BIKRAM, DISTT- PATNA.

7.

PREM CHAND PRASAD, PANCHAYAT SEVAK, MAHAJPURA PANCHAYAT UNDER BLOCK BIKRAM, DISTRICT- PATNA. .... .... OPPOSITE PARTY/S =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. RAM JIBAN PD. SINGH, ADVOCATE. For the Respondent/s : MRS. SNAGHMITRA GHOSH, AC TO AAG-8 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 02-03-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.C. to A.A.G-8 appearing for the State.

The present contempt application has been filed for noncompliance of the order dated 21.01.2013 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1116 of 2013 whereunder the aforesaid writ application was disposed of with a direction to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Paliganj Sub-Division, District Patna (opposite party no.3) to consider the application of the petitioner and pass appropriate

Patna High Court MJC No.3933 of 2013 dt.02-03-2015 orders in accordance with law in respect of grievance of petitioner preferably within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh application along with a copy of this order before the SubDivisional Officer. Learned A.C. to A.A.G-8 appearing for the State submits that in compliance of the order under contempt, opposite party no. 3 has disposed of the representation of the petitioner vide order dated 14.11.2013 and also communicated the same to the petitioner, which would appear from annexure C to the show cause field on behalf of the opposite party no. 2. Since the order, under contempt, has been complied with by the opposite party no.3, therefore, no further action is required. Accordingly, this contempt application is disposed of. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U