Patna High CourtMJC/2658/2015disposed

Arun Kumar Verma v. Bihar State Electricity Board Patna Through Its Chairman Shri Pratay Amrit And ORS

2017-11-29Mr. Justice Hemant Kumar Srivastava2 pages

Patna High Court MJC No.2658 of 2015 (3) dt.29-11-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2658 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1832 of 2013 ======================================================

1. Arun Kumar Verma son of Late Basudeo Narayan Verma, resident of Mohalla- Tilak Nagar, Police Station and District- Begusarai. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Bihar State Electricity Board Patna, through Its Chairman, (Now Chief Managing Director) namely Shri Pratay Amrit.

2. Secretary (now termed as Managing Director, namely Dr. Prativa Verma

3. Member Finance, Bihar State Electricity Board Patna now this post is abolished

4. Financial Controller, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna {Now termed as Sri Manager (B & L)} namely Shri B.K. Nirala.

5. Joint Secretary, Bihar Secretary Electricity Board, Now this post is abolished

6. Sri Sanat Kumar Pathak, Electrical Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division Begusarai.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amresh Kr. Verma For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 29.11.2017 Heard.

Although learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no instruction from his client regarding fully compliance and satisfaction of the order of this court but para 5 of the show cause filed on behalf of the opposite party goes to show that order of this court has already been complied with and payment of Rs. 1,08,958/- through cheque no. 883235 dated

Patna High Court MJC No.2658 of 2015 (3) dt.29-11-2017 19.12.2015 has already bee made.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that no interest has been paid to the petitioner but in my view, non-payment of interest on the aforesaid amount can not be looked into in the present contempt petition and, therefore, in the aforesaid circumstance, this petition stands disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to raise his grievance before appropriate forum, if he is not satisfied with the above stated payment.

Shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) U