Patna High CourtMJC/516/2014disposed

Satguru Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-10-13The Chief Justice2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.516 of 2014 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1718 of 2010 =========================================================== Satguru Prasad S/O Late Santan Prasad Resident Of Mig- 32, Anugrahpuri, Chanakyapuri Coloney, Gaya, Police Station - Gaya, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through Dr. S.Sidharath, Ias The Principal Secretary, Department Of Urban Development Housing, Government Of Bihar, Patna.

2. Anupam Kumar Suman, Its, Managing Director, Bihar State Housing Board, 6, Mangle's Road, Patna

3. Lalanji, The Then Revenue Officer- Cum- Chairman, Pricing Committee, Bihar State Housing Board, 6, Mangle's Road, Patna.

4. Hira Lal, The Chief Engineer- Cum- Chairman, Pricing Committee, Bihar State Housing Board, 6 Mangle's Road, Patna.

5. Manish Kumar, The Revenue Officer, Bihar State Housing Board, 6, Mangle's Road, Patna

6. Ashok Kumar, The Then Executive Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board, Gaya, Division, Gaya.

7. Ram Bhuwan Singh, Executive Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board, Gaya, Division, Gaya.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. RAJIV NAYAN SINGH For the Respondent/s : Mr. AMAR NATH DEO =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 13-10-2017 On perusal of Annexure-A of the show cause dated 12.03.2014, it is seen that in pursuance to the order passed on 29.03.2012 in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1718 of 2010, the matter was placed before the Pricing Committee and the Pricing Committee has taken certain decision in the matter as is evident from Annexure-A.

Patna High Court MJC No.516 of 2014 dt.13-10-2017 2/2 That being so, now no case is made out to make any indulgence into the matter. In case the petitioner has any grievance with regard to the manner in which the Pricing Committee has dealt with the issue in question, it gives fresh cause of action to the petitioner to challenge the same, in accordance with law. In view of the aforesaid, finding no case made out for initiating action for contempt, the application stands disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) Shageer/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 19/10/2017 Transmission Date NA