Patna High CourtMJC/269/2013disposed

Malti Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-09-11Justice Smt. Anjana Mishra3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.269 of 2013 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8140 of 2007 ====================================================== Malti Devi W/o Late Shankar Prasad Singh R/O Village - Radhakhar, P.S. Bhagwanpur, District - Kaimur At Present Residing At Mohalla - Bhatari ( Awadhut Nagar ) South Of Hotel Shershah, P.O. And P.S. Sasaram, P.O. And P.S. Sasaram, District - Rohtas .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Sri Alok Kr. Sinha Agriculture Producation Commissioner, Bihar, Patna

3. Sri Arvindra Singh Director Of Agriculture, Bihar, Patna

4. Sri Ganesh Ram Joint Agriculture Director, Patna, Division, Patna

5. Sri Naresh Nath Deputy Agriculturer Director - Cum - Enquiry Officer, Patna

6. Sri Balesh Nr. Singh, District Agriculture Officer, Rohtas At Bhojpur .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amrendra Darayen, Adv. Mr. Deepak Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Ankit Katiyar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajiv Roy GP-1 Mr. Suresh Kumar, AC to GP -1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 11-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

It appears from the order dated 26th of September, 2008 that the writ application including that of the petitioner was disposed of giving certain directions for considering all the retiral benefits and other terminal dues. After the order dated 26th of September, 2008 was passed, the petitioner's individual representation was considered and

Patna High Court MJC No.269 of 2013 (12) dt.11-09-2017 2/3 disposed of on 23.10.2008. It appears from the Annexure-3 series that in between the said period on 16.11.2009, the Court had again issued direction that if petitioner is aggrieved by non-compliance of the orders, he will be at liberty to file individual contempt application. The said order was passed in C.W.J.C. No. 8140 of 2007. The representation thereafter was filed on 16.10.2012 (Annexure-3 series). The orders passed in C.W.J.C. 8140 of 2007 was again sought to be placed before this Court in MJC No. 269 of 2013.

Meanwhile, the petitioner had also sought implementation of an order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 14436 of 2005 which was disposed of on 23.07.2007. The MJC which arose out of the same was numbered as 2435 of 2007. It appears from the said order that this Court, after considering the grievance, observed that if the petitioner is aggrieved by any order passed on 23rd of January, 2008 (Annexure-F), which is also Annexure - R- 6/B, the petitioner would have a remedy to challenge the said order in accordance with law before an appropriate Bench.

In view of the fact that both the orders are identical, this Court does not find any further need to proceed in the contempt application. The contempt

Patna High Court MJC No.269 of 2013 (12) dt.11-09-2017 3/3 application stands disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to raise all the grievances before the appropriate forum, if so advised.

(Anjana Mishra, J) Jagdish/- U