Birendra Sharma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
Patna High Court MJC No.449 of 2014 dt.10-02-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.449 of 2014 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8445 of 2013 =========================================================== BIRENDRA SHARMA, SON OF LATE RAMAWATAR SHARMA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE + POST - BARARA, P.S. NOORSARAI, DISTRICT - NALANDA, AT PRESENT RESIDING AT 108(E)/3, 'UPASANA', NEAR QUARTER NO. - 44, POSTAL COLONY, KIDWAIPURI, PATNA .... .... PETITIONER/S
VERSUS
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA NAMELY, DR. S. SIDDHARTH.
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA, NAMELY, DR. S. SIDDHARTH
3. THE BIHAR STATE HOUSING BOARD, PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, NAMELY, SH. ANUPAM KUMAR SUMAN.
4. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, THE BIHAR STATE HOUSING BOARD, PATNA, NAMELY, SH. ANUPAM KUMAR SUMAN.
5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BIHAR STATE HOUSING BOARD DIVISION - 2, PATNA, NAMELY, SH. SANJAY KUMAR. .... .... OPPOSTIE PARTY/S =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. MARUTH NATH ROY For the Respondent/s : Mr. MADHUKAR KRISHNA SINHA =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 10-02-2015 Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite parties are present.
Learned counsel for the Bihar State Housing Board, Patna, submits that in compliance of the order dated 26.08.2013 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 8445 of 2013, which is under contempt, in the light of the representation of the petitioner, admissible amount
Patna High Court MJC No.449 of 2014 dt.10-02-2015 of Rs. 1,60,617/- has been paid through cheque to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits petitioner has received the cheque of Rs. 1,60,617/- but the calculation chart has not been provided to him.
Since the order, under contempt, has already been complied, therefore, no action is required. Accordingly, this contempt application is disposed of. However, if the petitioner feels any grievance, he may take recourse in accordance with law. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U