Dharmeshwar Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2707 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7501 of 2008 ====================================================== Dharmeshwar Prasad Singh, son of Late Gauri Shankar Singh, R/o villageYelwa tola, block Road, P.O.- Jainagar, District- Madhubani... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Bihar & Ors ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ratan Kumar Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. SC Kumar Alok ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 21-08-2018 The order seems to have been passed by the learned Writ Court on 22.09.2010 giving liberty to the petitioner to make a representation and on such representation being filed, as per observation of the Court, the claims may be verified and paid with interest permissible under the Rules within a period of four months.

Learned counsel representing the University has rightly pointed out that a bare perusal of the certified copy enclosed with the contempt application would show that the petitioner obtained the certified copy on 08.06.2016 and immediately, thereafter, he filed the contempt application on 14.07.2016. In paragraph 2 of the contempt application, even though, a statement has been made that the petitioner made a representation with the Hon'ble Court's order claiming the benefits but neither the copy of the representation has been

Patna High Court MJC No.2707 of 2016(4) dt.21-08-2018 2/2 enclosed nor the mode of dispatch of such representation has been stated in paragraph 2 of the application and, therefore, considering the fact that after six years the certified copy was obtained and within little over a month the contempt application was field, the statement made in paragraph 2 seems to be vague and would not inspire confidence.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on bare perusal of the record, I find force in the submission advanced on behalf of the University. Neither there is any categorical statement with regard to submission of representation with date and mode of dispatch of such representation nor a copy of the same has been brought on the record.

In such circumstance as also considering that the contempt application has been filed after a period of six years approximately without complying the own obligation by the petitioner, this application cannot proceed and this contempt application is disposed of.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) avin/- U