Ram Prasad Mishra v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4815 of 2013 ====================================================== Ram Prasad Mishra, son of Late Brahmdatta Mishra, Resident of Mohalla Panchaitiya Akhara, P.S. - Kotwali, District - Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Mr. Amarjeet Sinha, son of not known to the petitioner, presently posted as The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna.

3. Shri Ajay Kumar Chaudary, son of not known to the petitioner, the Director, Primary Education, Human Resources Development Department, New Secretariat, Patna.

4. Sri Medo Dass, son of not known to the petitioner, the Regional Deputy Director Of Education, Magadh Division, Gaya.

5. Rajiv Ranjan Prasad, son of not known to the petitioner, the District Education Officer, Gaya.

6. Sri Ashok Kumar, son of not known to the petitioner, the District Provident Fund Officer, Gaya.

7. Md. Rijwan, son of not known to the petitioner, the Treasury Officer, Gaya.

8. Sri Kameshwar Prasad Singh, son of not known to the petitioner, the Incharge Head Master, Swatantra Madhya Vidyalaya, Panchaitiya Akhara, Gaya.

9. Sri Sheoyogi Singh, son of not known to the petitioner, the Head MasterCum-Drawing And Disbursing Officer, Mahabir Madhya Vidyalaya, Sawarajpuri Road, Gaya.

10. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, son of not known to the petitioner, presently posted as the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

11. A.C. Sharma, son of not known to the petitioner, the Branch Manager, Allahabad Bank, Ragendra Tower Chowk, Gaya.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shambhu Nath, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Madanjit Kumar, G.P. 20 For the Accountant General :

Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the Allahabad Band :

Mr. Ajay Kr. Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL ORDER 02-02-2018 From the order passed by the Writ Court it is seen that an innocuous order has been passed which only directs that the GPF amount of the petitioner shall be settled. According to the respondents, the same has been settled and the petitioner vehemently opposes the same by contending that the amount

Patna High Court MJC No.4815 of 2013(5) dt.02-02-2018 2/2 has not been properly settled. In the order passed, the direction was only to settle the claim of the petitioner and dispute with regard to quantification of the claim has not been gone into. That being so, in this contempt proceedings, I cannot travel beyond the order and quantify the amount of the GPF by adjudicating the dispute between the parties with regard to the same.

That being so, no further indulgence into the matter is called for. In case, the petitioner has any grievance with regard to quantum of the provident fund, liberty shall be available to challenge it afresh and claim further amount of the GPF in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid, the application stands disposed of. (Rajendra Menon, CJ) Sunil/- U