← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/2012/2023disposed

Ramesh Ray v. The State Of Bihar

2023-12-15Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2012 of 2023 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8394 of 2021 ====================================================== Ramesh Ray Son of Shyam Yadav, resident of Maroofganj, Pathar Ghat, Patna City, Post Office-Jhauganj, Police Station-Malsalami, District-Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Amir Subhani, son of not known, presently posted as the Chief Secretary Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna, Bihar.

2.

Sri Yashpal Meena, presently posted as District Magistrate, Vaishali. 3.

Jairam Prasad Singh, presently posted as Circle Office, Raghopur, Vaishali. 4.

Munna Singh, son of Late Srikant Singh, Resident of Village-Jahagirpur, Post Office-Raghopur, District-Vaishali.

5.

Pramod Kumar Yadav, presently posted as Officer-in-Charge, Malsalami Police Station, Post Office-Jhauganj, District-Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kameshwar Singh, Advocate Mr. Diwakar Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Bhagat, AAG 12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 15-12-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The instant application has been filed alleging noncompliance of the directions contained in the order dated 28.2.2023 passed in CWJC no.8394 of 2021.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representation having been filed by the petitioner along with the copy of the order dated 28.2.2023 on 3.3.2023, the opposite parties did not comply with the directions passed by this Court, did not dispose of the representation of the petitioner as directed

Patna High Court MJC No.2012 of 2023(6) dt.15-12-2023 2/2 within a period of 4 months and as such compelled the petitioner to file the instant application.

4. Learned counsel for the opposite parties referring to the show cause filed on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 submits that for reasons beyond control as stated in detail in the said show cause, the representation could not be decided within the time fixed.

5. Tendering unqualified apology, learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that the representation of the petitioner has been disposed of on merits rejecting the same by order dated 27.9.2023 (Annexure-C) passed in Misc Case no.1 of 2023-24.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the contents of the petition as also the show cause filed, the Court is satisfied that no case for proceeding with the contempt application is made out.

7. The petitioner will be at liberty to challenge the aforesaid order dated 27.9.2023 in accordance with law.

8. The application stands disposed of.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash U