Ram Lakhan Ram v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1421 of 2014 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2256 of 2013 ====================================================== Ram Lakhan Ram Son Of Sri Ram Kumar Ram Resident Of Village - Balapokhar, P.O. - Deo, P.S. Deo, District - Aurangabad, At Presently Posted As Tola Sevak In Rajkiya Urdu Middle School Bakapakhar, Mahadalit Uthan Kendra Balapokhar, Block - Deo, District - Aurangabad .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary Old Secretariate, Bihar, Patna, Bihar, Sri A.K. Sinha

2. The Principal Secretary, Sri Amarjeet Sinha Human Resources Development Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna

3. The State Project Director, Bihar Education Project Council, Beltron Bhawan, Sastrinagar, Patna

4. The District Magistrate, Aurangabad, Sri Abhijeet Sinha

5. The District Education Officer, District Prgramme Coordinator, Aurangabad, Sri Ram Pravesh Singh

6. The District Programme Officer, Primary Education And Sarv Shikha Abhiyan, Bihar Education Project, Auranagabad, Sri Mithlesh Kumar

7. The Block Education Extension Officer, Deo, District - Aurangabad, Sri Sanjay Kumar

8. The Head Mastyer, Rajkiya Urdu Middle School Balapokhar, P.O. Deo, Block - Deo, District - Aurangabad, Md. Karim. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Purushotam Sharma, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajiv Roy GP-5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 23-06-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Having regard to the fact that the order of this Court has already been complied by way of passing a reasoned order rejecting the claim of the petitioner, this Court would find no reason, now, to continue with this contempt proceeding because the only direction to the Opposite

Patna High Court MJC No.1421 of 2014 (2) dt.23-06-2015 Parties was to consider the case of the petitioner and pass a reasoned order. That having been done by the Opposite Parties as is apparent from reading of Annexure-4, the order dated 27.06.2013, there would be no occasion for this Court to hold the Opposite Parties guilty in any manner for violation of the direction given in the order dated 05.02.2013 in C.W.J.C No. 2256 of 2013.

This contempt application in fact was wholly misconceived right from inception and deserves to be dismissed.

This Court, however, will have no difficulty in allowing the prayer of the petitioner to accord him leave to assail the aforementioned order passed by the authority rejecting the claim of payment of salary before appropriate forum/Court as may be permissible in law.

Subject to the aforementioned observation and liberty, this application stands dismissed.

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Ranjan/- U