Mukti Nath Mishra v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2588 of 2014 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 19488 of 2012 ====================================================== Mukti Nath Mishra S/o late Ramadhar Mishra R/o Village- Barka Rajpur, P.S.- Simri, District- Buxar.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. Amit Lal Meenu, the State of Bihar through Agricultural Production Commissioner, Govt. of Bihar Patna.

2. Mr. R.K. Mittal, the Vice-Chancellor, Rajendra Agriculture University, Pusa, Samastipur.

3. Mr. M.L. Agrawal, the Registrar, Rajendra Agriculture University, Pusa, Samastipur.

4. Mr. Devashish Dutta, Director of Administration, Rajendra Agriculture University, Pusa, Samastipur.

5. Mr. Mewalal Choudhary, the V.C. Bihar Agriculture University Sabour, Bhagalpur.

6. Mr. Chhotelal Mourya, the Registrar of Bihar Agriculture University Sabour, Bhagalpur.

7. Mr. Aditya Prasad, the Director of Administration, Bihar Agriculture University, Sabour, Bhagalpur.

8. R.N. Singh, the Regional Director, Agricultural Research. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : None For the Opposite Parties: Mr. Jai Shankar Barnawal, GA 5 For O.P. Nos. 5 to 8 : Mr. Chandra Mohan Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 22-07-2015 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner when the matter is called out.

2. A show cause has been filed on behalf of opposite party nos.5 to 8, inter alia, stating that the State Government by its letter no.3123 dated 24.06.2015 has sanctioned an amount of Rs.3,94,70,685/- for payment to various employees of the Universities including the petitioner and funds are likely to

Patna High Court MJC No.2588 of 2014 (4) dt.22-07-2015 2/2 be released shortly. It is, therefore, submitted that in this view of the matter, the opposite parties have substantially complied with the order of this Court and there is no willful disobedience thereof.

3. Considering the show cause filed on behalf of the opposite parties, as stated above, this Court is not satisfied to proceed further in the matter as the amount to be paid to the petitioner now stands sanctioned.

4. The petition stands thus disposed of. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/- U