Md. Barjhan @Md. Warjhan v. The State Of Bihar Through Principal Secretary, Road And Construction Department,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1995 of 2025 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8802 of 2016 ====================================================== 1.
Md. Barjhan @Md. Warjhan Son of Late Jamsad Ali, Resident of Village Lalganj, P.O.-Mahadevpur, P.S.- Pranpur at present Lalganj Teghra, English, District- Katihar.
2.
Mrs. Abha Singh, The Block Development Officer, Pranpur, Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Road and Construction Department, Patna, Bihar namely Dr. B. Rajender 2.
Mr. Manish Kumar Mina, The Collector, Katihar, 3.
Mr. Shankar Sharan, the Sub Divisional Officer, Katihar, 4.
Md. Khurshid, The District Land Acquisition Officer, Katihar, 5.
The SDO, Road Construction Department, National Highway Construction Department, Lalganj, Pranpur, Katihar name is not available. 6.
Mr. Rajnish Mishra, The Engineer, National Highway Construction Department, Lalganj, Pranpur, Katihar 7.
Mrs. Shikha Kumari, The Circle Officer (C.O.) Pranpur, Katihar. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sandeep Patil, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Government Pleader 19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 19-09-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The present Misc. Jurisdiction Case has been preferred for the following relief(s):
for initiating contempt proceeding against the official respondents for deliberately violating the courts order passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy in CWJC No. 8802 of 2016 dated 13.02.2024, by which his lordship has given clear direction respondents and liberty to
Patna High Court MJC No.1995 of 2025(3) dt.19-09-2025 2/2 petitioner.
3. A perusal of the order dated 13.02.2024 would show that no direction was given to the opposite parties, only liberty was granted to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum/authority, if he so wants.
4. In view of the fact that no direction was issued, MJC No. 1995 of 2025 has got no meaning, accordingly, disposed of.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Raj Ranjan/- U T