Sunita Kuar v. The State Of Bihar Through Mr. R.K. Mahajan Principal Secretary Human Resources Department Higher

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3228 of 2015 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 481 of 2011 =========================================================== Sunita Kuar wife of late Chandra Deo Upadhyay, resident of village-Kesath, P.S. Nawanagar, District-Buxar.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar Through Mr. R.k. Mahajan Principal Secretary Human Resources Department ( Higher Education) Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. Mr. R.K. Mahajan, Secretary, Human Resources Department ( Higher Education) Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. Mr. Azahar Hussain, Vice Chancellor, Bir Kuar Singh University Ara, Bhojpur.

4. Mr. Manoj Kumar, Registrar, Bir Kuar Singh University Ara, Bhojpur.

5. Mr. Narendra Kumar, Principal, Sher Shah Takiya College, Sasaram, Rohtas. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rang Nath Choubey, Adv. For the University : Mr. Arabind Nath Pandey, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Atal Bihari Pandey, Adv. A.C. to G.P. 22 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 27-04-2016 Heard Mr. Choubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pandey, learned counsel for the Bir Kuer Singh University. The direction was issued by order dated 25.09.2014 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 481 of 2011 for disposal of the representation which may be filed by the petitioner for redressal of her grievances. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the order has been passed by the University as Annexure-B to the show

Patna High Court MJC No.3228 of 2015 dt.27-04-2016 cause rejecting the claim of the petitioner while disposing of the representation. It has been submitted that the said order is entirely illegal.

Mr. Pandey, learned counsel for the University has submitted that since the direction as contained in the order dated 25.09.2014 has already been complied, no case for initiation of the contempt proceeding, as prayed, is made out.

After considering the submissions and the materials on record, this Court finds that the direction as contained in the order dated 25.09.2014 has been complied by the respondents and therefore there is no merit in this contempt petition praying for initiation the proceeding of contempt against the respondents. The contempt petition is, accordingly dismissed. The petitioner shall, however, be at liberty to seek redressal of her grievances in accordance with law.

(V. Nath, J) Devendra/- U