Kumar Mitra v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1622 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7949 of 2014 ====================================================== Kumar Mitra, son of Shri Raj Kumar Mandal, resident of village+P.O.- Belhi, P.S.-Marauna, District-Supaul.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary Sunil Kumar Singh, Minor Irrigation Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Sunil Kumar Singh, Minor Irrigation Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Engineer-in-Chief Deo Narayan Prasad Technical Investigation Cell, Vigilance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Chief Engineer (North) Narendra Kumar, Minor Irrigation Department, Muzaffarpur.
5. The Executive Engineer, Jagarnath Paswan, Minor Irrigation Division, Begusarai.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-08-2016 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. However, despite repeated calls, none appears on behalf of the opposite parties, though the name of the learned State counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties is printed in the daily cause list.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, by referring to the averments made in the show cause filed on behalf of the opposite party no.5, submits that in compliance of the order dated 07.01.2015 passed in CWJC No.7949 of 2014 (Annexure-1), the representation filed on behalf of the petitioner has been disposed of by the Chief Engineer, Minor Irrigation Resources Department, Muzaffarpur, which has been brought on record as Annexure-A to the aforesaid show
Patna High Court MJC No.1622 of 2015 (2) dt.17-08-2016 cause, but some valid grievances of the petitioner are yet to be redressed.
In view of the averments made in the aforesaid show cause as also the order passed by the Chief Engineer, as contained in Annexure-A to the aforesaid show cause, this Court is satisfied that the order of the Writ Court has been complied with, and no case for initiating a proceeding of contempt against the opposite parties herein is made out.
Accordingly, the present MJC application is dismissed.
However, the petitioner, if so advised, shall be at liberty to challenge the aforesaid order in an appropriate proceeding before an appropriate forum/court. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) Arvind/- U