Kalpana Rani And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3437 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1747 of 2015 ====================================================== Kalpana Rani W/o late Arun Kumar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, Collector, Gaya.

3.

Binay Kumar Saha, Land Acquisition Officer, Gaya. 4.

Krityanand Ranjan, Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Gaya. 5.

Anuj Kumar, Circle Officer, Khijarsarai, District- Gaya. 6.

Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Gaya.

7.

C.B. Singh, Union of India through Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Gaya.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dinesh Prasad Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, SC-26 Mr. Santosh Kr. Mishra, AC to SC-26 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 06-05-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief:

"for non compliance, disobedience /violation of the order dated 26.08.2015 passed by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Birendra Prasad Verma (as his lordship then was) in C.W.J.C. No. 1747 of 2015 by which order the Hon'ble Court held that as per the aforesaid fact and circumstances of the case in view of the fact that the respondent State of Bihar and others have calculated the amount of

Patna High Court MJC No.3437 of 2015(14) dt.06-05-2025 2/2 compensation payable to the petitioner to the tune of Rs. 74,05,809. The Hon'ble High court disposed of the above mentioned case with a direction to the respondent no. 1 to 6, particularly respondent no. 6 to make payment of the aforesaid amount to the at petitioner at an early date preferably within a period of two months from today."

3. Learned State counsel submits that he has got the information that the payment has been made.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though he has no information, he accepts the words of the learned State counsel.

5. However, he may be granted liberty that if the said statement is incorrect, he can file another petition for the same grievance.

6. Granting liberty, the contempt petition stands disposed of.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U