Kapil Prasad And ANR v. The State Of Bihar Through Sri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Collector Cum District Magistrate, Jehanbad And O

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2485 of 2017 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9450 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Kapil Prasad, Son of Rajan Yadav,

2. Rajballabh Yadav, Son of Late Mahbir Yadav, Both are Resident of Village- Panchwai, P.S.- Barabar Paryatan, District- Jehanabad.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.The State Of Bihar Through Sri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Collector Cum District Magistrate, Jehanbad & Ors

2. The Dr. Nawal Kishore Choudhari, Sub-Divisional Officer, Jehanabad.

3. Sri Niranjan Kumar, Circle-Officer, Makhdumpur. .............Opposite Parties 1st set.

4. Kameshwar Yadav.

5. Yugal Yadav,

6. Subelal Yadav,

7. Munni Yadav, and

8. Laldeo Yadav.

Sl. No. 03 to 07 are Sons of - Late Ramchritra Yadav, Resident of VillagePanchwai, P.S.- Barabar Paryatan, District- Jehanabad. .............Opposite Parties 2nd Set.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Lal, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Khurshid Alam - AAG 12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 30-04-2018 Complaining disobedience of the order passed on 03.10.2016 in CWJC No. 9450 of 2016, this application has been filed for initiating action for contempt. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the concerned statutory authority to dispose of Encroachment Case No. 1 of 2016 within a period of three months. The aforesaid order was passed in a public interest writ petition

Patna High Court MJC No.2485 of 2017(4) dt.30-04-2018 2/2 without notice to the respondents and now inter alia contending that within the time stipulated, the Encroachment Case has not been decided, this application has been filed for initiating action for contempt.

Keeping in view the aforesaid grievance of the petitioner, for the present, without initiating any action for contempt, respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 are directed to ensure that Encroachment Case No. 1 of 2016 is decided, if not already done, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, failing which the petitioner shall bring the fact to the notice of the Court and this Court would consider initiating action for contempt against respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3.

With the aforesaid, the contempt application stands disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) ( Sanjay Kumar, J) Sunil/- U