Patna High CourtMJC/2634/2015disposed

Gayatri Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-09-06Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2634 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13822 of 2012 ====================================================== Gayatri Devi, wife of Late.Vishnuedeo Prasad, R/o Village- Aditpur, P.S. Shusrupur,District- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.The State of Bihar through Sri. Pratay Amrit, the Secretary, Department of Energy, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.The Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, through it's Secretary, Sri. Pratay Amrit.

3.Sri. Nagendra Prasad, the Electrical Executive Engineer, Electricity Supply Circle, Patna.

4.Sri. Suresh Prasad, the Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Section, Fatuha, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Anisur Rahman, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Sr. Adv. For the S.B.P.D.C.L : Mr. Vijay Verma, Adv. Mr. Akhilesh Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 06-09-2018 In view of the order as contained in Annexure 'A' to the show cause filed on behalf of O.P.No.4, the order of the learned writ Court stands complied with.

It appears the petitioner had moved this Court earlier in the writ Jurisdiction seeking consideration of her claim for compassionate appointment. Pursuant to the order of the learned writ Court the Electrical Executive Engineer has now considered the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment but has been rejected by a reasoned order.

Patna High Court MJC No.2634 of 2015 (6) dt.06-09-2018 2/2 At this stage, now in this contempt proceeding, learned counsel for the petitioner is trying to agitate an issue as to payment of compensation to the petitioner in view of the own circulars and guidelines of the Power Company. Since, there is no such direction of the learned writ Court, sitting in its contempt jurisdiction, this Court would not like to issue any fresh direction to the Opposite Parties. It is however, left open for the petitioner to raise her claim for compensation if admissible in terms of the own policy decision of the Power Company.

This application stands disposed off, accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) R.R.Ojha.