Dhirendra Ram v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4285 of 2013 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16927 of 2012 ====================================================== Dhirandra Ram, Son of Sri Ram Bilash Ram, resident of Village: Ankorhi, P.S. Begangola, District: Buxer.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Amarjeet Sinha, the Principal Secretary Human resources Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. R.S. Choudhary, The Director, Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. Binod Singh Gunjiyal, the District Magistrate, Buxar.

4. Uma Kant Srivastava, The District Teachers Employment Appellate Tribunal, Buxar, District-Buxar.

5. Nitish Ranjan Mandal, the District Education Officer, Buxar.

6. Smt. Kamal Kumari Gupta, the Block Education Officer, Brahmpur, District: Buxar.

7. Pravindra Kumar Singh, the Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj Pokharahan, District: Buxar.

8. Anant Kumar Singh, the Appointment Committee of Pokharahan Gram Panchayat Secretary, District: Buxar.

9. Jitendra Kumar Baitha, the Head Master, Primary School Pokrahi, P.S. Brahmpur, District: Buxer.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satyapal Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Tej Bahadur Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 26-07-2018 After some arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner finds that the order dated 27.09.2012 passed in CWJC No. 16927 of 2012 has been complied with inasmuch as the District Education Officer, Buxar has passed an order dated 20.02.2015 but he points out that the said order dated 20.02.2015 has been passed in contravention of the law laid down by this

Patna High Court MJC No.4285 of 2013 (22) dt.26-07-2018 2/2 Court in various judgments, one of them being a judgment dated 19.06.2014 passed in CWJC No. 21891 of 2012.

In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the view that once the order of this Court, disobedience whereof, has been complained of, has been complied with, the consequential order passed by the authorities is required to be assailed by way of filing a fresh writ petition.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the present contempt petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to assail the order dated 20.02.2015. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/- U