Braj Kishore Dwivedi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.966 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12861 of 2007 ====================================================== Braj Kishore Dwivedi son of Late Kanhaiya Dwivedi. Resident of village - Nawagawa, P.O.- Dumaria State, Via Harinagar, P.S.- Ram Nagar, District - West Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Registrar, Co-operative Society Bihar, Patna namely Mr. Hukumdeo Singh Minna.

2. The Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bihar Patna namely Mr. Hukum Deo Singh Minna.

3. The Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank Ltd. Budh Marg Patna through Chairman namely Mr. Vijay Singh.

4. The Chairman Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank Ltd. Budh Marg, Patna namely Mr. Vijay Singh.

5. The Managing Director, Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank Ltd. Budh Marg, Patna namely Vinod Kumar Singh.

6. Secretary, Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank Ltd. Budh Marg, Patna namely Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh.

7. The Director (Personnel), Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank Ltd. Budh Marg Patna, namely Md. Mazid Alam. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey For the State : Mr. Mahendra Prasad Verma, A.C. to SC-20 For the Bank : Mr. Rajesh Prasad Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 31-07-2018 The learned counsel for the opposite parties has filed a show cause stating that the order of this Court dated 21.08.2013 passed in CWJC No. 12861 of 2007 has been complied with and the entire amount of retiral benefits have already been paid to the petitioner, details whereof is mentioned in paragraph no. 3 of the show cause filed today.

Patna High Court MJC No.966 of 2015 (8) dt.31-07-2018 2/2 In view of the aforesaid, there is no need to proceed further in the present petition. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of, however, with a liberty to the petitioner that in case the said statement made by the opposite parties in paragraph no. 3 of the show cause is not correct, the petitioner would be liable to file a petition for revival of the present contempt petition. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/- U