Patna High CourtMJC/1161/2015disposed

Chinta Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-11-08Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 1161 of 2015 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 10843 of 2011 ====================================================== Chinta Devi W/O- Late Sri Kant Dwivedi, R/O Road No.- 6D, Gardanibagh, Sadhnapuri, Aam Bagicha, P.S.- Gardanibagh, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Amir Subhani, the Principal Secretary General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. Ashwini Dattatireya Thakur, the joint Secretary General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. Arun Kumar Mishra the Director Provident Fund Directorate at Department of Finance, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5. Sanjay Kumar the Accountant General Bihar, Birchand Patel Marg, Patna.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER 08-11-2017 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State and Accountant General have assisted the Court.

2. Learned counsel for the State submitted that in view of the averments made in the show cause filed on behalf of the opposite parties no. 2 and 3, the order of the Court dated 14.01.2015 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 10843 of 2011, was required to be complied with by the S.D.O., Narkatiaganj. However, details have also been given with regard to the payments made to

Patna High Court MJC No.1161 of 2015 (3) dt.08-11-2017 2/2 the petitioner in terms of the earlier order of the Court. Copy of the show cause was served on learned counsel for the petitioner on 15.09.2015. Neither any rejoinder has been filed to the same nor anybody is present to press the application, when the matter is taken up.

3. In view thereof, the Court can safely presume that the order has been complied with.

4. Accordingly, the application stands disposed off. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar U