Patna High CourtMJC/2750/2014disposed

Bhagwan Mishra v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-05-22Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2750 of 2014 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1385 of 2014 ======================================================

1. Bhagwan Mishra son of Late Brahma Kant Mishra resident of village - Gandhwari, P.S. Sakri, District - Madhubani .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. S.M. Raju, Secretary, Department of Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna

3. J. Sidharth, Principal Secretary, Department of Gramin Karray Vibhag, Old Secretariat, Patna

4. Pankaj Kumar, Principal Secretary, Department of Planning and Development, Government of Bihar, Patna

5. Tej Nr. Ram, Chief Engineer, Local Area Engineering Organisation, Viseshwaraiya Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna

6. Kumar Ravi, District Magistrate/Collector, Darbhanga

7. Viveka Nand Jha, Deputy Development Commissioner ( DDC ), Darbhanga Collector, Darbhanga

8. Prasun Kumar, Executive Engineer, Local Area Engineering Organisation, Works Division, Benipur, P.S. Bahera, District - Darbhanga .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 22-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In the present case, petitioner has made a complaint that order dated 6.3.2014 passed in C.W.J.C. No.1385 of 2014 has not been complied with.

A show cause has been filed in which reasoned orders dated 30.5.2014 and 9.12.2014 have been attached with

Patna High Court MJC No.2750 of 2014 (8) dt.22-05-2017 respect to the petitioner.

It appears that the authorities have passed the orders in pursuance of the order passed by this Court. This Court while sitting in contempt proceeding cannot look into the merit of the case.

Accordingly the present contempt proceeding is dropped. If the petitioner feels aggrieved, he will be at liberty to take legal course in accordance with law.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Vinay/- U