Lal Prasad Mehta v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 1072 of 2015 In Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 6434 of 2013 ====================================================== Lal Prasad Mehta S/o Late- Deoraj Mehta R/o Village- Murdpur Hujara Malhai Patti, P.S.- Arwal, District- Arwal, Presently residing at Village & Post- Agnoor, P.S.- Kaler, District- Arwal.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Sanjay Singh S/o Not Known Posted as District Magistrate-cumCollector, Arwal.

3. Prabhat Kumar Jha S/o Not Known Posted as District Land Acquisition Officer, Arwal.

4. Prabhat Kumar Jha S/o Not Known Posted as District Land Acquisition Officer, Gaya.

.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar For the Opp. Party/s : AC to SC - 22 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2.

22-07-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.C. to Standing Counsel - 22.

The present petition has been filed on behalf of petitioner to initiate contempt proceeding against opposite parties for making incorrect statement in the show cause. I have perused the earlier order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2973 of 2013, whereby direction was given to the respondent no. 3 of the writ petition i.e. District Land Acquisition Officer, Arwal to examine the objection petition of the petitioner and take final decision within specified time. On the plea of non-

Patna High Court MJC No.1072 of 2015 (2) dt.22-07-2015 2/2 compliance of the order of the writ court, earlier contempt petition was filed by the petitioner, vide M.J.C. No. 6434 of 2013. In the said contempt petition, show cause was filed on behalf of opposite parties and it was indicated that order of the writ court has already been complied with.

The petitioner in the present case has brought on record a copy of show cause earlier filed on behalf of opposite party no. 2 & 3, in which the order passed by the District Land Acquisition Officer, Arwal has been enclosed. By the said order, the District Land Acquisition Officer, Arwal has referred the matter to the Sub-Judge I, Civil Court, Jehanabad. On examining the materials on record, the Court is of the opinion that no incorrect statement was made by the opposite parties. I do not find any ground to proceed with the matter. The petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U