Ranjeet Kumar Sinha v. The District Magistrate Cum Collector,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1497 of 2025 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3253 of 2025 ====================================================== Ranjeet Kumar Sinha S/o Late Nageshwar Prasad Sinha, Resident of Village P.S.- Pandaul, P.S.- Anchal-Ratni Faridpur, District- Jehanabad and presently residing at 26-A, Ajanta Hirapur, P.S District- Dhanbad, Jharkhand. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The District Magistrate cum Collector, Jehanabad. 2.

Alankrita Pandey, I.A.S., the District Magistrate cum Collector, Jehanabad. 3.

The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Jehanabad.

4.

Ravi Shekhar Kumar, the Land Reform Deputy Collector, Jehanabad. 5.

The Circle Officer, Ratni Faridpur, District- Jehanabad. 6.

Koushalaya Kumari, the ex-Circle Officer, Ratni Faridpur, DistrictJehanabad. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Rishika Jha, Adv Mr. Gajendra Pratap Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, AC to GP-3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-06-2025 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to GP-3.

2.

The instant contempt application has been filed for initiating a proceeding of contempt against the opposite parties for deliberately violating the order dated 4-3-2025 in CWJC No. 3253 of 2025.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by order dated 4-3-2025 in CWJC No. 3253 of 2025, this Court had directed the District Magistrate, Jehanabad, to dispose of the

Patna High Court MJC No.1497 of 2025(2) dt.20-06-2025 2/3 representation of the petitioner, if filed on or before 18-3-2025, within a period of one month thereafter, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, further it was also directed that if the petitioner files any application on or before 18-3-2025, in that event further construction of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan on the land in dispute shall remain stayed.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that no doubt the Collector in compliance of the order dated 4-32025 in CWJC No. 3253 of 2025, has passed an order dated 104-2025, but then in the interregnum, i.e. from 4-3-2025 till passing of the order by the Collector, the construction of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan was proceeding and was not stayed, thus it is submitted that the order of this Court was breached. 5.

The learned State counsel submits that a frivolous contempt application has been filed and the same should be dismissed with cost. It is next submitted that if what has been alleged in the contempt application is true, then why the instant contempt application was not filed soon after the order dated 43-2025 was passed in CWJC No. 3253 of 2025. It is further submitted that from perusal of the contempt application, it appears that the contempt application was filed on 18-4-2025 and it is being alleged that the construction of the Panchayat

Patna High Court MJC No.1497 of 2025(2) dt.20-06-2025 3/3 Sarkar Bhawan, despite order dated 4-3-2025 in CWJC No. 3253 of 2025, was continuing. It is thus submitted that had the construction proceeded, despite orders of this Court, in that event the petitioner would have moved this Court instantly. 6.

The Court is in complete agreement with the submission made by the learned State counsel and thus finds no merit in the contempt application.

7.

Accordingly, the contempt application is dismissed. (Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U