Bhagirath Prasad Singh v. The Administrator, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3422 of 2013 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9460 of 2000 ====================================================== Bhagirath Prasad Singh son of Late Amar Pd. Singh resident of Village- Mor, P.S.- Mokama, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Administrator, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation Sultan Palace, Patna- 800 001 Mr. Uday Singh Kumamat.

2.

The Managing Director, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Sultan Palace, Patna- 800 001, Mr. Uday Singh Kumamat. 3.

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mritunjay Prasad Singh Mr. Satyendra Narain Singh, Advocates For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Lakshmi Kant Tiwary, Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocates ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 18-04-2019 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 this Court dated 26.11.2002 passed in CWJC No. 9460 of 2000.

3. On cumulative perusal of the show cause as well as the supplementary show cause filed on behalf of the opposite parties it would transpire that the amount of dues of the petitioner as per details enclosed in Annexure-C has since been paid to the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are some discrepancies in the details of payment and claim and that some further amount remains outstanding. However, it has also been submitted that even though the order of this Court has been

Patna High Court MJC No.3422 of 2013 dt.18-04-2019 2/2 passed as far back as on 26.11.2002 in CWJC No. 9460 of 2000 containing directions for payment of the dues of the petitioner, the same has been paid after considerable delay and the petitioner is entitled for interest for the delayed payment.

5. Having heard the parties, this Court is satisfied that the order of the writ Court stands complied with.

6. MJC No. 3422 of 2013 stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner that in case he is aggrieved by the order of the authorities as noticed above, he may agitate the same before an appropriate forum in accordance with law, if so advised. (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 22.04.2019 Transmission Date NA