Ram Nandan Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3608 of 2012 ====================================================== Ram Nandan Choudhary Retired as Staff (Karya Karta) District Khadi Gramodyog, Branch, Barka Gau, Parsoni, East Champaran S/O Late Rajendra Choudhary Resident of Village Dularpur Post Makrampur Via Pandaul, District Darbhanga.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Minor Industries Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Purbi Champaran Zila Khadi Gramodyog Sangh, Motihari, through its Mantri Secretary Sri Rama Shankar Prasad

3. The Regional Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Bihar Khadi Bhawan, Patna Sri Rajesh Pandey.

4. The Sub Regional Officer I/C Naya Valeafaishay Court Compound Muzaffarpur Sri K.Rupeshwar Singh.

.... .... Opp.Parties.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ratan Kumar Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. AC to AAG-8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 27-04-2016 Heard Sri Ratan Kumar Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AC to AAG-8, Sri Prabhakar Kumar, learned counsel for Opp.Party no.2 and Sri Prashant Sinha, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of Opp.Party no.3. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to initiate contempt proceeding against Opp.Parties on an allegation of wilful disobedience to an order dated 30.09.2011 passed in C.W.J.C.No. 17509 of 2011. By the said order, on the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition was disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the

Patna High Court MJC No.3608 of 2012 (5) dt.27-04-2016 2/2 authority concerned by filing proper representation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after filing of the representation, Opp.Party no.2 has passed order and it has been alleged that some amount was due against the petitioner. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, action was to be taken by the authority concerned in accordance with law, if anything is due.

The petitioner has also filed reply to the show cause. Besides hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have also perused the materials on record. In the writ petition, save and except granting liberty to file representation before the authority concerned, there was no any direction for making payment. The authority concerned after examining the record, has passed order. The Court may not examine the correctness of the action pursuant to filing of the representation.

Accordingly, I do not find any ground to proceed with the matter. The petition stands disposed of.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U