Patna High CourtMJC/2879/2013disposed

Ausutosh Ellani v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2015-02-04Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

Patna High Court MJC No.2879 of 2013 dt.04-02-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2879 of 2013 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13149 of 2012 =========================================================== AUSUTOSH ELLANI, S/O LATE KANHAIYA LAL SINDHI, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA KATHALBARI, POLICE STATION L.N.M.U.

CAMPUS, DISTRICT DARBHANGA.

.... .... PETITIONER.

VERSUS

1. THE STATE OF BIHAR.

2. SHREE UMESH SINGH, S/O NOT KNOWN PRESENTLY POSTED AS CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER, UNITED BANK OF INDIA, KATIHAR. .... .... RESPONDENTS.

=========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Respondent/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 04-02-2015 Learned counsel for the Chief Regional Manager, United Bank of India, Katihar (opposite party no.2) submits that in compliance of the direction of the order under contempt, the opposite party no. 2 considered the representation of the petitioner under the Died-in-Harness Scheme, 2007 and found the petitioner eligible for grant of ex-gratia lump sum amount of Rs.8,00000/- (Rupees Eight Lac only) in lieu of compassionate appointment as his case was found appropriate to be considered only under the provisions of Clause 4 A of the Died-in-Harness Scheme and the said decision is also communicated to the petitioner through letter dated 30.12.2014, which would appear from Annexure C to the supplementary show cause.

Patna High Court MJC No.2879 of 2013 dt.04-02-2015 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the decision as contained in Annexure C is not in accordance with law. Since the Chief Regional Manager, United Bank of India, Katihar (opposite party no.2) has decided the representation of the petitioner in compliance of the order under contempt and communicated the same to the petitioner through letter dated 30.12.2014, Annexure C to the supplementary show cause, no further action is required to be taken. If the petitioner still aggrieve, he may take recourse in accordance with law before the appropriate forum. Accordingly, this contempt application is disposed of. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/- U