Arun Kumar Mishra v. Sri S.K.Goel Deputy Divisional Manager, Zonal Office S.B.I.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1205 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10781 of 2010 ====================================================== Arun Kumar Mishra Son of Shri Santan Rai resident of Veer Kuar Singh Colony, Gaya, P.S. Magadh Medical College, Gaya, District - Gaya. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

Sri S.K. Goel, Deputy Divisional Manager, Zonal Office S.B.I., Judges Court road, Patna 2.

Md. Ayajuddin, Regional Manager Regional Business Office, S.B.I. First Floor, Hotel Taj Darbar, Main Road Bodh Gaya. 3.

Md. Auasuddin, the Assistant Deputy General Manager, S.B.I. Regional Office Anugrah Puri Colony, Gaya Near Asha Singh More, Gaya. 4.

Sri Anand Kumar, Chief Manager, S.B.I. Jehanabad. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad Sinha, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party:

Mr. Kaushlendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 25-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite parties.

2. The present petition has been filed for initiating a contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for willful disobedience of the order of the writ court dated 09.05.2014 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 10781 of 2010.

3. Learned counsel for the opposite parties states that the order of the writ court stands complied with and the payment found admissible to the petitioner has since been paid.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly accepts that he has received payment of the amount due to him however it is

Patna High Court MJC No.1205 of 2016 dt.25-04-2019 2/2 submitted that no interest in respect of delayed payment has been made.

5. A perusal of the order of the writ court discloses that there was a direction for consideration of the petitioner's claim and upon taking a decision in that regard, to make payment of the required amount to the petitioner. However there was no direction for making payment of interest for delayed payment of the amount in question.

6. In this view of the matter, this Court is satisfied that the order of the writ court stands complied with.

7. The contempt petition stands disposed.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar/BT AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 29.04.2019 Transmission Date N.A.