← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/2929/2019disposed

Sudha Rani @ Sudha Rani Sinha @ Sudha Sinha v. The State Of Bihar

2025-05-01Mr. Justice Nani Tagia2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2929 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21433 of 2018 ====================================================== Sudha Rani @ Sudha Rani Sinha @ Sudha Sinha W/o Ravishankar Sinha Resident of Brahman Toli, Police Station- Nauhatta, District- Saharsa. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Sri Amir Subhani, The Home Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.

Smt. Shailaza Sharma The District Magistrate, Saharsa 3.

Sri Dhirendra Jha The Additional Collector, Saharsa 4.

Sri Shambhu Nath Jha The Sub Divisional Officer, Saharsa 5.

Sri Abu Akhtar The Circle Officer Nauhatta, Distt.- Saharsa 6.

Sri Suman Kumar The Station House Officer, Nauhatta, Distt.- Saharsa ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Satish Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Prabhat Kumar Verma (Aag3) Dr. Anand Kumar, AC to AAG-3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2025 This contempt application has been filed alleging violation of the order dated 17.01.2019 passed in CWJC No. 21433 of 2018 wherein, respondent No. 2/ the Collector cum District Magistrate, Saharsa was directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of filing of such representation.

2. Opposite party Nos. 2-5 have filed a show-cause wherein, in paragraph-9 it has been stated as under: "...9. That the allegation raised

Patna High Court MJC No.2929 of 2019(3) dt.01-05-2025 2/2 by the petitioner in paragraph Nos. 4 and 5 of the M.J.C. petition bear no truth in the light of the facts stated in the brief history and are denied by the opposite parties the representation filed by the petitioner has already been disposed of by getting the land of the petitioner measured and carved out by the Anchal Amin, as stated in the brief history...."

3. On perusal of the show-cause filed by the opposite party Nos. 2-5, I find that the order dated 17.01.2019 passed in CWJC No. 21433 of 2018 has been complied with by the respondents.

4. Accordingly, this contempt application stands closed and disposed off.

(Nani Tagia, J) Nishant/- U