M/S Shri Shyam Enterprises v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1406 of 2023 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6085 of 2022 ====================================================== M/s Shri Shyam Enterprises a proprietorship firm having its place of business Near Kamla Devi Sthan, Kachuari Gali, Patna City, Patna through its Proprietor namely Amit Kanodia Male aged about 40 years, son of Ram Gopal Kanodia, Resident of Jajak Toli, Nai Sadak Chowk, Opposite SBI, Patna City, P.S. Chowk, Patna-800008.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Prayyaya Amit the Principal Secretary Department of Health, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

Dr. Rameshwar Safi the Civil Surgeon cum CMO, Sadar Hospital Campus, Sitamarhi.

3.

Dr. Dayanand Malik through the Additional Chief Medical Officer, Office of Civil Surgeon cum CMO, Sadar Hospital Campus, Sitamarhi. 4.

Sachin Kumar through the Accounts Officer, Civil Surgeon cum CMO, Sadar Hospital Campus, Sitamarhi.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gautam Kumar Kejriwal, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Randhir Kumar, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR) 19-06-2026 Heard Mr. Gautam Kumar Kejriwal, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Randhir Kumar, learned Counsel for the State.

2. The application has been filed seeking initiation of a contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for their willful and deliberate disobedience of the order of this Court dated 19.05.2022 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 6085 of 2022.

3. A show-cause affidavit has been filed on behalf of O.P. No. 2 showing compliance of the order of this Court. It is

Patna High Court MJC No.1406 of 2023(5) dt.19-06-2026 2/2 categorically averred that in the light of the order of this Court, the claim of the petitioner was duly examined and a reasoned order has been passed on 12.12.2025 and an amount of Rs. 4,49,888/- has also been sent to the Treasury for payment and accordingly, payment has also been done.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the claim of the petitioner has not been considered in the manner, which was required to be done and he is still aggrieved with the action of the respondents.

5. Be that as it may, considering the submissions advanced and the averments made in the show-cause affidavit, we do not find any reason or occasion to continue with the present proceeding. Accordingly, the present contempt petition stands closed.

6. However, if the petitioner is still aggrieved with the action of the respondents, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail his remedies in accordance with law.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) (Harish Kumar, J) shivank/rohitU