Vishal Kumar v. Shri Amir Subhani

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1548 of 2023 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.24919 of 2018 ====================================================== Vishal Kumar, Son of Ramlakhan Prasad Singh, Resident of House No. 328, Salarpur House Navneet Colony, Hanuman Nagar Kankarbagh, District and Town- Patna, Pin- 800026.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Shri Amir Subhani Son of not known, the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna. 2.

Shri Pratyaya Amrit, Son of not known The Principal Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

Shri Ramawatar Sharma, Son of not known The Accountant General, Bihar, Birchand Patel Path, Patna.

4.

Shri Nand Kumar Gupta, Son of Not known Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, Central Pension Processing Centre, Administrative Office Building, 4th Floor, J.C. Road, Patna- 800001. 5.

Shri Rajeev Kumar, Son of not known The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Kankarbagh Branch, Patna- 800020.

6.

Sri Amit Kumar, the then Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Kankarbagh Branch, Patna- 800020, at present Chief Manager, S.M.E. Branch Ranchi, MACON Campas, Doranda, Ranchi, State- Jharkhand, Pin- 834002, Phone0651- 2482616 (Mob. no.- 9771450332). 7.

Sri Treasury Officer, Sadar Patna, District- Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. S. D. Yadav, AAG- 9 Mr. Prem Ranjan Kumar, AC to AAG-9 For the S.B.I.

:

Mr. Sanjiv Kumar, Advocate For the AG :

Ms. Supragya, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 05-01-2024 Heard Mr. Dilip Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.D. Yadav, learned AAG-9 for the State. Ms. Supragya, learned counsel for the Accountant General is also present.

2. It is submitted on behalf of the State that total

Patna High Court MJC No.1548 of 2023(6) dt.05-01-2024 2/2 admissible amount to the tune of Rs.15,27,787/- have been credited in the account of the petitioner and, as such, the order of this Court under contempt has already been complied with.

3. The aforesaid fact has not been confronted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, however, he submits that the petitioner has attained the age of 80 years and, as such, he must be allowed the additional pension of 20 per cent under the resolution issued by the State Government.

4. Considering the fact that the order of this Court dated 23.11.2022 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 24919 of 2018 has been complied with, the present contempt petition stands disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate representation before the concerned authority, who shall look into the matter.

(Harish Kumar, J) uday/- U