Patna High CourtMJC/2869/2016dismissed

Dhirendra Nath Trivedi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar Through Sri Arun Kumar Singh, Commissioner- Cum- Secretary And ORS

2018-08-25Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2869 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 15234 of 2008 ======================================================

1. Dhirendra Nath Trivedi Son of Sri Ras Bihari Trivedi, Resident of Village- Koran Sarai, Post Office- Koran Sarai, Police Station- Koran Sarai, District- Buxar (Bihar).

2. Upendra Nath Tiwary Son of Sri Laxman Tiwari. Resident of VillageMasona, Post Office- Shearuaon, Police Station- Sanjhouli, DistrictRohtas (Sasaram). .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Sri Arun Kumar Singh, CommissionerCum- Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. Sri Arun Kumar Verma, Management of Executive Engineer, Sone Canal, Division Bikramganj under the Department of Water Resources Departmetn, Government of Bihar.

3. Sri Arun Kumar Singh, Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. Sri Indu Bhushan Prasad Yadav, Engineer-In-Chief, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5. Sri Rameshwar Choudhary, Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Dehri-on-Sone, Division Rohtas, (Bihar).

6. Sri Rajesh Kumar, Superintending Engineer, Sone Canal, Circle Arrah, District- Bhojpur (Bihar).

7. Sri Mritunjay Kumar, Sub Divisional Officer, Sone Canal, SubDivision Nasriganj, District- Rohtas (Bihar). .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajendra Nath Ojha, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajiv Roy, GP-1 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 25-08-2018 Learned counsel for the petitioners admits that payments have been made in terms of the order, however, he has tried to contend that the payment has been made at the rates wages payable to the casual laboures whereas the petitioners are Meth. Learned counsel for the State submits that whatever

Patna High Court MJC No.2869 of 2016 (2) dt.25-08-2018 be the contention of the petitioners the opposite parties were obliged to implement the award of the Industrial Tribunal which has already been done.

In the aforesaid view of the matter, this contempt application does not survive.

It is dismissed, accordingly.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Ved/- U