M/S Yashoda Bharatgas, Ekma, Saran And ANR. v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.6645 of 2012 ===========================================================

1. M/S Yashoda Bharatgas, Ekma, Saran (Bihar) through its sole proprietor Shri Hridaya Narayan Singh, son of late Ramadhar Singh, resident of Manjhi Road, P.O. and P.S. Ekma, District Saran.

2. Hridaya Narayan Singh, son of Late Ramadhar Singh, proprietor, M/S Yashoda Bharatgas, Ekma, Saran ( Bihar), resident of Manjhi Road, P.O. and P.S. Ekma, District Saran.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Government of Bihar Enterprise, Patna Territory (L.P.G.) through Territory Manager (LPG), Mr. Rajeev Jaiswal,.

2. Mr. Rajeev Jaiswal, the Territory Manager (LPG), Patna, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited.

.... .... Opp.parties.

=========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Ashish Giri, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Madhuresh Prasad, Advocate. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 13-05-2015 Heard Mr. Ashish Giri learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Madhuresh Prasad learned counsel for the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (for short 'the Corporation'). This application alleges wilful disregard/disobedience of the interim order dated 30.8.2012. By the aforesaid order, this Court, while considering the writ petition had granted interim stay of the order of cancellation. Aggrieved thereby the Corporation vide LPA No. 1618 of 2012. The same was disposed of by order dated 23.1.2013 permitting the Corporation to file appropriate application for vacation of the interim order. I.A. No. 711 of 2013 was thereafter filed in the pending writ petition which

Patna High Court MJC No.6645 of 2012 dt.13-05-2015 2/2 was considered and dismissed on 07.02.2013. Whereagainst the Corporation filed writ appeal vide LPA No. 385 of 2013. The same was allowed and the interim order passed on 30.8.2012 was set aside. There is no dispute that the writ application was finally allowed by order dated 16.7.2013. The corporation has filed LPA No. 1114 of 2013 well within the time prescribed therefor which is pending consideration. The facts, noticed hereinabove, eloquently discloses that present contempt application should not be entertained by this Court. The petitioners of the writ case have already filed a contempt application against the final order passed on the writ petition which is pending consideration.

The contempt application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Shyam/- U