← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/2124/2013dismissed

Ganesh Jamadar v. The Bihar State Road Transport, Patna And ORS.

2016-03-04Mr. Justice Ramesh Kumar Datta2 pages

Patna High Court MJC No.2124 of 2013 (3) dt.04-03-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2124 of 2013 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 11082 of 2012 ======================================================

1. Ganesh Jamadar S/O Sri Late Sonu Jamadar Resident Of Village Khirouti Garh, P.S. Ghosi, District Jehanabad.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Mr. Anand Kishor, The Bihar State Road Transport Corporation Through Its Administrator Parivahan Bhawan, Beerchand Patel Path, Patna, Bihar.

2. Mr. Siya Ram Singh, The Accounts Officer, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation Parivahan Bhawan, Beerchand Patel Path, Patna, Bihar.

3. Mr. Ashok Singh, The Divisional Manager, Depot Gaya Bihar State Road Transport Corporation Division, Gaya.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA ORAL ORDER 04-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The contempt application has been filed for willful disobedience of the order dated 02.07.2012 of this Court passed in C.W.J.C. No.11082 of 2012.

By the aforesaid order, this Court had directed the respondent Bihar State Road Transport Corporation to settle and pay the admissible claims of the petitioner with regard to his post retiral dues within a period of six months.

In the show cause filed on behalf of the opposite parties of the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, it is submitted that the petitioner had, as a matter of fact, been dismissed from service

Patna High Court MJC No.2124 of 2013 (3) dt.04-03-2016 by order dated 26.11.2011, which fact was suppressed in the writ application.

Thus, for the said reason, the petitioner was not entitled to his post retiral dues.

So far as the other dues payable to the petitioner is concerned, the same has already been paid according to the opposite parties.

The contempt application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J) V.P.Sinha/- U