Tapan Kumar Sharma And ORS v. The Bihar Staff Selection Commission Through Its Secretary Namely Yogendra Ram And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4648 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12757 of 2018 ====================================================== 1.

Tapan Kumar Sharma Son of Dinesh Sharma, R/o Village Barhauna, P.O. Barhauna, P.S. Chandi, District- Nalanda.

2.

Akbar Hassan, Son of Abul Hassan, R/o Mohalla Chhawani Ward No 10, P.O. Bhabua , P.S.- Bhabua, District- Kaimur. 3.

Braj Bhushan Pandey, Son of Late Ram Shakal Pandey, R/o VillagePatariya P.O. Patariya, P.S. Jehanabad, District- Jehanabad. 4.

Lakshman Rawat, Son of Satyanarayan Rawat, Resident of VillageGopalpur, P.S. Chanan, District- Lakhisarai, At present 2 NO. Bhuli Quarter Aena, Koliyari, P.O.- Dhansar, District- Dhanbad, Jharkhand, Pin Code828106. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Bihar Staff Selection Commission Through Its Secretary Namely Yogendra Ram 2.

Sanjeev Kumar Sinha, The Chairman, Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Veterinary College, Patna - 80 3.

Yogendra Ram, The Secretary, Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Veterinary College, Patna - 800014.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satyam Shivam Sundaram, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 28-02-2024 Heard the parties.

2. The MJC No. 4648 of 2018 has been preferred for compliance of the order dated 13.08.2018 passed in CWJC No. 12757 of 2018.

3. A show cause on behalf of opposite party nos. 1,2 and 3 is on record in which the order dated vide memo no. 3424 dated 27.12.2019 is on record according to which, taking into

Patna High Court MJC No.4648 of 2018(2) dt.28-02-2024 2/2 account an order of the Hon'ble Apex Court, it has been averred that save and except 133 appellants, who were before Hon'ble Apex Court, no further consideration can be made.

4. The petitioners always have the liberty to challenge the order, if they so want.

5. This Court is satisfied that no further direction can be issued in contempt petition.

6. The MJC No. 4648 of 2018 stands disposed of. (Rajiv Roy, J) kiran/- U