The State Of Bihar And ORS v. Koshi Project Workers Association And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.669 of 2016 ======================================================

1. The State Of Bihar, Water Resources Department, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna through the Commissioner cum Secretary.

2. The Deputy Secretariat, Water Resources Department, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna.

3. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Purnea.

4. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division No.1, Water Resources Department, Purnea.

5. The Superintending Engineer, Canal Circle, Water Resources Department, Purnea.

6. The Joint Secretary, Water Resources Department, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna.

.... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. Koshi Project Workers Association, Birpur through its General Secretary Parmanand Singh son of Late Kamleshwari Singh, resident of Birpur, P.S.- Birpur, District- Supaul.

2. Bipin Bihari Singh son of Late Santalal Sinngh, resident of VillageRampur, P.S.- Sangrampur, District- Munger.

3. Mukesh Nandan Sahai, Son of Late Binktesh Nandan Sahay resident of Village- Saidpura Gandhi School Road, P.O. and P.S.- Khagaul, District- Patna.

4. Birendra Narain Singh, Son of Late Ramashankar Prasad Singh, resident of Village- Barurak, Supaul District- Supaul. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Niraj Kumar, AC to GA-10 For the Respondent/s : Mr. Birendra Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 23-06-2017 Having heard counsels for the parties, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

I.A. No. 3000/2016 stands disposed of.

In view of the order passed in CWJC No. 8795 of

Patna High Court LPA No.669 of 2016 (5) dt.23-06-2017 2/2 2008 and the earlier order passed in CWJC No. 6124 of 2006 so also the order dated 28.12.2002, Annexure-7 to the writ petition and various orders passed by the Apex Court and the settlement arrived at, we are of the considered view that the observations made by the learned writ Court with regard to the attitude of the Officers and the manner in which the Officers are dealing with the issue in question, are most apt and appropriate and the expression of the learned Single Judge goes to show the manner in which the respondents are dealing with the issue, we could have taken action against the Officers and proceeded against them but warning them to be careful in future and to implement the decision of the writ Court within a period of two months failing which contempt action shall be taken against them.

We dismiss the appeal.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) S.Pandey/- U