← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/2612/2015disposed

Shyam Sundar Thakur v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-09-12Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2612 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 660 of 2007 ====================================================== Shyam Sundar Thakur Son of Late Harischandra Thakur, Resident of Village - Balha Madhusudan,P.S. - Pupri, District - Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Mr. Rajiv Raushan, The Collector, Sitamarhi.

3. Mr. Kishore Prasad, The S.D.O., Pupri, District - Sitamarhi.

4. Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, The Circle Officer, Pupri, District - Sitamarhi.

5. Mr. Lavlesh Kumar, B.D.O., Pupri, District - Sitamarhi.

6. Mrs. Rina Devi, The Mukhia Gram Panchayat Raj Balha Madhusudan, P.S. - Pupri, District -Sitamarhi. null null

7. Mr. Kapildeo Sah, Panchayat Secretary(Gram Panchayat Raj, Balha Madhusudan, P.S. Pupri, District - Sitamarhi. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Devendra Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Madhuresh Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 12-09-2018 First supplementary show cause has been filed on behalf of the opposite parties. On the calculation of the compensation amount of the land in question @ of Rs. 22,000/- per decimal the total amount payable to the petitioner comes to Rs. 29,590/-. After deducting the amount already paid to the petitioner, now a sum of Rs. 12,105/- is being paid by a cheque bearing No. 975068 dated 08.09.2018 drawn in favour of the petitioner. The cheque is being handed over to the learned counsel representing the petitioner for its onward submission to the

Patna High Court MJC No.2612 of 2015 (9) dt.12-09-2018 petitioner. A receipt thereof will be filed by learned counsel for the petitioner within a week from today.

This contempt application stands disposed off. The petitioner may be at liberty that in case he has any grievance in respect of amount in question, he may raise his claim which may be considered in accordance with law. This Court would, however, not be taken to have recognized to any such claim. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Ved/- U