Raja Ram Singh v. Arun Kumar Singh And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.6274 of 2013 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2976 of 2009 ====================================================== Raja Ram Singh Son of late Narayan Singh, resident of Mohalla - Harmandir Gali, P.S. - Chowk, District - Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Arun Kumar Singh, the Vice Chancellor Magadh University Bodh Gaya.

2. Sri Dinesh Kumar Yadav, the Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya.

3. Sri Sriniwash Srivastava, the Finance Officer, Magadh University Bodh Gaya.

4. Sri Dalbir Singh, the Principal, Sri Guru Goving Singh College, Patna City, District - Patna.

5. The State of Bihar through Sri Amarjeet Sinha, the Principal Secretary Education Deptt. Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amaresh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Lalit Kishore, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the University.

A show cause has been filed by the opposite parties in which they have stated that a sum of Rs. 86,363/- has been transferred into the account of S.G.G.S. College, Patna City, salary payment account (N/T) which has been sent by way of arrears of salary to Raja Ram Singh, Routine Clerk.

On the last occasion, learned counsel for

the petitioner has sought for an adjournment to reply to the submissions advanced by the opposite parties in their show cause. A rejoinder to the show cause has been filed by the petitioner.

However, after perusal of the same, the petitioner is unable to satisfy this Court as to how there has been non-compliance of the order passed especially, in view of the fact that certain payments have been released in his favour by the Magadh University. This Court also finds that there are several orders passed by the University by which it has been stated that the petitioner had appointed on the post of Routine Clerk only with effect from 14.07.1999 though the petitioner is claiming to be on the sanctioned post from 1995 itself. Document annexed by the petitioner shows that he was working on the non-sanctioned post which has been marked as Annexure-4 to his rejoinder application. Such orders have not been challenged by the petitioner till date.

Accordingly, no case of contempt is made out in the present facts and circumstances of the

case. The Contempt application stands disposed of. However, it shall be open to the petitioner, if so advised, to proceed and seek other remedies in accordance with law.

(Anjana Mishra, J) Jagdish/- U