Raja Om Prakash v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.498 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 22909 of 2013 ====================================================== Raja Om Prakash, Son of Dr. Shiv Swaroop Sahay, resident of Subhash Nagar, P.S. - Balia, District- Balia(U.P.) .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna, namely Sri Anjani Kumar Singh.

2. Mrs. Harjao Kaur, Secretary, Road Construction Department, Bihar, Patna.

3. Mr. Chanchal Kumar, Secretary, Rural Works Department, Bihar, Patna.

4. Mr. Laxmi Narain Das, Engineer-in-Chief, Road Construction Department, Bihar, Patna.

5. Mr. Dharmdeo Chaudhary, Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Secretary, Rural Works Department, Bihar, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhu Nath Pathak For the Respondent/s : Mr. Gp24- Anshuman Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL ORDER 16-09-2015 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the opposite parties. The present contempt application has been filed alleging violation of order dated 03.12.2014 passed in C.W.J.C.No.22909/2013 by which on the prayer of the petitioner the writ application was disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file representation before the respondent no.3 and directing the respondent no.3 to dispose of the said representation by a reasoned and speaking order.

In the show cause filed on behalf of the opposite party nos. 3 and 5 it has been stated that the representation filed by

Patna High Court MJC No.498 of 2015 (2) dt.16-09-2015 the petitioner has been disposed of by order dated 27.02.2015 which has been annexed as Annexure-A to the show cause. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents have wrongly rejected his claim for promotion and therefore the order dated 27.02.2015 has not been passed in accordance with law.

Mr. Ansuman Singh, the learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties has submitted that in the limited domain of contempt law, the legality, validity and propriety of the order passed on 27.02.2015 cannot be gone into. After considering the submissions and in view of the facts and materials on record, this Court does not find any case for initiation of contempt has been made out against the opposite parties.

The contempt application is accordingly, dismissed.

The petitioner shall be at liberty to seek redressal of his grievances appropriately in accordance with law. (V. Nath, J) Nitesh/- U