← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/3577/2019disposed

Nirmala Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

2020-02-19Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3577 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4538 of 2019 ====================================================== Nirmala Kumari Wife of Sri Jitendra Kumar, R/o Village- Dharampur, P.S. Sarmera, District Nanlanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Nalanda. 2.

Mr. Joginder Singh, the District Magistrate, Nalanda. 3.

Mr. Janardan Pd. Agarwal, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Biharsharif, BlockSarmera, District-Nalanda. 4.

Smt. Sangeeta Bhagat, the Child Development Project Officer, Block Sarmera, District Nalanda, Biharsharif.

5.

Smt. Rashmi Sinha, the District Programme Officer, Block Sarmera, District- Nalanda, Biharsharif.

6.

Mr. Shivanandan Singh, the Circle Officer, Block Sarmera, District Nalanda, BIharsharif.

7.

Gudiya Kumari Wife of Shri Mungeri Paswan, Resident of VillageDharmpur, Ward No.14, P.S. Sarmera, District-Nalanda. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vivek Anand Amritesh, Advocate Mr. Sudhanshu Trivedi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Prashant Pratap (GP 2) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-02-2020 In view of the order passed by this Court on 26.03.2019 in C.W.J.C. No. 4538 of 2019, the District Programme Officer, Nalanda has passed an order dated 12.09.2019 which has been brought on record as Annexure - A to the compliance affidavit.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the last paragraph of the order passed by the District Programme Officer, Nalanda

Patna High Court MJC No.3577 of 2019(3) dt.19-02-2020 2/2 which according to his estimation is self-contradictory. In any view of the matter, the petitioner has the liberty to challenge the aforesaid order in an appropriate proceeding.

Since a direction was given by this Court to advert to the representation of the petitioner and dispose it of by a reasoned order and the same having been done, this Court is not inclined to pursue this matter in the contempt jurisdiction.

The records of this case is consigned with the liberty to the petitioner to agitate against the order passed by the District Programme Officer, Nalanda in an appropriate forum, if so desired.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) Krishna/- Gaurav S.

U