Patna High CourtMJC/2094/2013disposed

Shri Haridwar Pandey v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-06-23The Chief Justice2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2094 of 2013 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7278 of 2007 =========================================================== Shri Haridwar Pandey, Advocate, Son Of Late R.D. Pandey Permanent Resident Of Village- Baghakol, P.S.- Ara Mufassil in the district of Bhojpur but Presently Residing At Laxmi Bhawan, South, P.P. Colony, Patna- 13. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Sri Pratuya Amrit I.A.S. the Secretary Road Construction Department, Vishwasharaya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 800001.

2. Sri Jai Karan Singh, the then Executive Engineer, Field Survey Division, Arrah Having His Office Running in Mahaveer Bhawan, Club Road, Ara belonging to the petitioner but the office of the Executive Engineer has been shifted to Manihari At Katihar As Works Division, Manihari. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jai Shanker Pathak, Advoate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Raghwanand, G.A.11 Mr. Dr. Kamal Deo Sharma, AC to GA-11 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 23-06-2017 Considering the fact that the respondents have paid the amount to the petitioner as per their calculation contained in the calculation chart filed after the orders were passed by this Court, objection now raised by the petitioner in the 9th supplementary affidavit is a dispute between the parties after the settlement of the claim as calculated by the respondents. The said dispute cannot be looked into and adjudicated in a proceeding for contempt. The petitioner now after settlement of his claim is required to challenge the action in an appropriate forum and the dispute now in the matter of calculation and

Patna High Court MJC No.2094 of 2013 dt.23-06-2017 2/2 payment of benefits to the petitioner after deduction of taxes etc. cannot be adjudicated in this contempt application.

With the aforesaid, the application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to claim the same afresh in accordance with law. (Rajendra Menon, CJ) Sunil/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 28.06.2017 Transmission Date