Raju Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1017 of 2022 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12603 of 2021 ====================================================== Raju Prasad Son of Late Ram Chandra Prasad Resident of Mohallah- Ram Sahay Lane, Mahendru, P.S.- Sultanganj, Town and District- Patna- 800006. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Sri Amir Subhani, the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

Sri S. Sidharth, The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

Sri Lokesh Kumar Singh, The Secretary (Resources), Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

Dr. Chandra Sekhar Singh, The District Magistrate, Patna. 5.

Sri Praveen Kumar, The Deputy Collector (Establishment), Patna. 6.

Sri Arun Kumar, The Treasury Officer, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar Tiwari, Advocate Mr. Lal Mani Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh (AAG- 13) Mr. Arya Achint, AC to AAG-13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 20-09-2022 In the instant contempt petition question for consideration is whether petitioner/complainant has been put back to the post of Accountant in Patna Treasury Office, Patna or not?

Perusal of the records, it is evident that petitioner/complainant has been put back to the post of Accountant in Patna Treasury Office, Patna. Even as on the date of final disposal of C.W.J.C. No. 12603 of 2021 on 14.02.2022,

Patna High Court MJC No.1017 of 2022 dt.20-09-2022 2/3 the petitioner/complainant has been continued as an Accountant. In disciplinary proceedings he has been punished while imposing penalty of compulsory retirement in which it has been shown as a Clerk in stead of Accountant. That may be typographical error or a bona fide mistake. In this regard, petitioner/complainant is hereby directed to submit a detailed representation to rectify the word of "Clerk" to that of "Accountant". If such representation is submitted, District Magistrate, Patna would issue necessary corrigendum to the order dated 09.05.2022 in so far imposition of penalty of compulsory retirement.

In the light of these facts and circumstances, the present contempt petition stands dropped.

As this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner/complainant submitted that quashing of transfer order dated 22.06.2021 on 14.02.2022 in C.W.J.C. No. 12603/2021 resulted in imposition of penalty of compulsory retirement, the same cannot be appreciated in the contempt proceedings for the reasons that scope of contempt petition is very limited to examine as to whether directions of this Court has been complied or not?

Accordingly, aforesaid contention of the

Patna High Court MJC No.1017 of 2022 dt.20-09-2022 3/3 petitioner/complainant is frivolous and it is rejected while imposing cost of Rs. 5,000/-. The cost shall be remitted in the Patna High Court Legal Services Committee within a period of four weeks from today.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J) rakhi/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 22.09.2022 Transmission Date