Sanjay Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1146 of 2022 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23512 of 2018 ====================================================== Sanjay Kumar Singh Son of Late Mahendra Narayan Singh, resident of Village and Post Office Arraha, Police Station Ghailarh District Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

2.

Shri Brajesh Malhotra, Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

Shri Goraknath, the Divisional Commissioner, Koshsi Division, Saharsa. 4.

Shri Shyam Bihari Meena, the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Madhepura.

5.

Shri Sinha Abhay Kumar, the Circle Officer, Alamnagar, District - Madhepura.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ram Nibash Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam (Aag 12) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI ORAL ORDER 19-04-2023 In C.W.J.C. No. 23512 of 2018 in para 8 and 9 following order was passed:- "8. The disciplinary authority is hereby directed to initiate a fresh enquiry in compliance of Rule 17 of Rules, 2005.

9. The petitioner shall be paid all monetary benefits during the intervening period from 08.01.2016 to this date. The same shall be calculated and disbursed to the petitioner at the interest of justice. Petitioner shall be taken back to duty at the earliest, subject to outcome of disciplinary proceedings to be initiated."

2. During pendency of the present petition a sum of

Patna High Court MJC No.1146 of 2022(5) dt.19-04-2023 2/2 Rs. 23,15,525/- has been paid to the petitioner. The petitioner is not satisfied with the aforementioned amount and he is disputing to the extent that he is entitled to more than what has been paid. The scope of contempt matter is limited. This Court has directed the concerned authority to settle the monetary benefits during the intervening period from the date 08.01.2016 to the date of disposal of the writ petition. Rightly or wrongly the concerned authority has calculated @ Rs. 23,15,525/-. Therefore, there is a compliance. Accordingly, M.J.C. stands dropped reserving liberty to the petitioner to agitate if he is still aggrieved to the extent that he has not been paid all arrears. In this regard, he is permitted to make a detailed representation as to how he is entitled to more than what has been paid, if it is submitted, competent authority to take decision on such representation.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J) rakhi/- U