Dharmshila Devi @ Dharmahila Kuer v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.5838 of 2012 ====================================================== Dharmshila Devi @ Dharmshila Kuer , wife of Late Braj Mohan Prasad Resident Of Village- Dhobdiha, P.S- Nasriganj, District- Rohtas, At Present Mohalla- Gorakshani, P.O And P.S- Sasaram (Town) , District- Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar.

2. Dr. S. Sidharth, father name not known, The Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna.

3. Sasaram Nagar Parishad, through its Executive Officer, Sri Prahlad Lal, father's name not known

4. Sri Prahiad Lal, father's name not known, The Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Sasaram, District- Rohtas.

5. Smt. Nazia Begam, husband's name not known, The Chief Councillor/ Chairman, Nagar Parishad, Sasaram, District- Rohtas. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vijay Shankar Upadhyay AC to GP 5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AC to GP No. 5 as well as Sri Vijay Shankar Upadhyay, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of the Nagar Parishad, Sasaram, Sri Upadhyay, learned counsel for the Nagar Parishad, at the very outset submits that the order of the writ court has already been complied in its letter and spirit and same fact has been disclosed in the supplementary show cause, which was filed on 15th April, 2015.

Learned counsel for the petitioner accepts that order of

Patna High Court MJC No.5838 of 2012 (7) dt.22-04-2015 2/2 the writ court has already been complied, but he disputes regarding fixing of family pension and even he submits that it has not been fixed in accordance with law.

The court is of the opinion that in contempt proceeding this court may not travel beyond the order of the writ court. Since order has already been complied, there is no need to keep the matter pending. It is made clear that if petitioner feels aggrieved with fixation of family pension, she would be at liberty to avail appropriate remedy.

The petition stands disposed of.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U