Patna High CourtMJC/2065/2016disposed

Umesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-01-11Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2065 of 2016 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5805 of 2015 =========================================================== Umesh Kumar, s/o Yugal Kishore Mahto, resident of Village- Parsauni Maliwar, P.S.- Parsauni, District- Sitamarhi.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Mr. Amrit Lal Meena, the Principal Secretary, Building Construction Deptt., Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. Mr. Rajendra Prasad Chaudhary, the Chief Engineer, Building Construction Deptt., Patna.

4. Mr. Dina Nath Chaudhary, the Superintending Engineer, Building Construction Deptt., Muzaffarpur Circle, Muzaffarpur.

5. Mr. Rajiv Raushan, the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi.

6. Mr. Hari Gopal Singh, the Executive Engineer, Building Division, Sitamarhi.

7. Mr. Vijay Kumar, the Assistant Engineer, Building Division, Sitamarhi.

8. Mr. Suresh Ram, the Junior Engineer, Building Division, Sitamarhi. .... .... Opposite Parties =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma, Adv. For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Kinkar Kumar, Adv. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 11-01-2017 Heard the parties.

2. The petition has been filed alleging deliberate violation of the order of this Court dated 07.12.2015 passed in CWJC No. 5805 of 2015 requiring the authorities to consider the petitioner's case and taking decision at their end.

3. A supplementary show cause has been filed on 23.12.2016 on behalf of the opposite party nos. 3, 4 and 6, Annexure-C

Patna High Court MJC No.2065 of 2016 dt.11-01-2017 2/2 whereof being a reasoned order dated 08.12.2016 discloses that a final decision has been taken by the Executive Engineer, Building Division, Sitamarhi and thus it is submitted that the order of this Court stands complied with.

4. In the above view of the matter, this contempt petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner that in case he is aggrieved by the order of the authorities as noticed above, he may agitate the same before an appropriate forum in accordance with law if so advised.

(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/B.T.

AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 12 .01.2017 Transmission Date N.A.