← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/3217/2017disposed

Yogendra Mahto v. The State Of Bihar Through Shirsat Kapil Ashok, The Collector Of The District, Madhubani And ORS

2023-10-04Mr. Justice Harish Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3217 of 2017 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4947 of 2012 ====================================================== Yogendra Mahto S/o Late Natthu Mahto R/o Village - Araria Sangram, P.O. - Tulapatganj, P.S. Anchal - Jhanjharpur, District - Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar Through Shirsat Kapil Ashok, The Collector Of The District, Madhubani and Ors 2.

Durga Nand Jha, The Additional Collector Cum Arbitrator NH - 57 Project, Madhubani, District - Madh 3.

Md. Kamruddin, the District Land Acquisition Officer cum Competent Officer NH - 57 Project, Madhuba 4.

Deepak Kumar, the National Highway Authority of India through its Chairman, Nhai, New Delhi.

5.

Manoj Kumar Pandey, the Project Director, Nhai, Darbhanga. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Khurshid Alam - Aag 12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-10-2023 Heard Mr. Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar Bhagat, learned counsel for the State.

2. It is submitted that pursuant to the order of this Court dated 07.08.2023, a show-cause has been filed on behalf of opposite party nos. 1 to 3, showing compliance of the order of this Court.

3. It is averred in the show cause that the petitioner has been paid the entire compensation amount as per the

Patna High Court MJC No.3217 of 2017(6) dt.04-10-2023 2/2 calculation, shown by the petitioner in his representation.

4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that irrespective of the direction of the Court, till date, the calculation chart has not been provided to the petitioner.

5. Be that as it may, considering the show-cause as noted hereinabove, the contempt petition stands disposed of having become infructuous.

6. Needless to observe that still the petitioner has any grievance with regard to the calculation, he may approach before the authority concerned for the same.

(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U