Patna High CourtMJC/3211/2015dismissed

Ramnath Singh v. The State Of Bihar Through Sri Anjani Kumar Singh The Chief Secretary Govt. Of Bihar Patna And ORS

2016-12-14Mr. Justice Ramesh Kumar Datta2 pages

Patna High Court MJC No.3211 of 2015 (3) dt.14-12-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3211 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7446 of 2005 ====================================================== Ramnath Singh son of Late Chabinath Singh resident of VillageLurpurwan, P.O.- Ankodhi Via- Mohania, P.S.- Mohania, District- Kaimur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Sri Anjani Kumar Singh, the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. Sri P.K. Thakur, Director General -cum-Inspector General of Police, Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.

3. Sri Amitabh Kumar Das, Inspector General of Police, Military Police, Bihar, Pant Bhawan, Patna.

4. Sri Shalin, D.I.G. of Police, Bihar Military Police, Central Zone, Patna.

5. Sri Chatranil Singh, Commandant, BMP-10, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Hriday Prasad For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kinkar Kumar, S.C.9 Mr. Zaki Haider, A.C. to S.C.9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA ORAL ORDER 14-12-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Opposite party No.5 is personally present in Court and a supplementary show cause has also been filed on his behalf. In the supplementary show cause, it is stated that the earlier order has been rectified by a force order dated 30.11.2016 counting the period of 731 days as working period from 01.02.2005 to 01.02.2007 and the payment of salary for the said period has already been made by demand draft dated 02.12.2016

Patna High Court MJC No.3211 of 2015 (3) dt.14-12-2016 amounting to Rs. 3,83,580/-.

Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that the aforesaid amount has been received by the petitioner. From a perusal of the order under contempt, it is evident that the opposite party No.5 has purged his contempt. In the aforesaid circumstances, the proceedings of contempt are dropped.

(Ramesh Kumar Datta, J) V.P.Sinha/- U