Santosh Kumar Pankaj v. The Bihar State Financial Corporation
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2557 of 2022 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19435 of 2021 ====================================================== Santosh Kumar Pankaj son of Late Baldeo Singh, grandson of Late Ramchandra Singh, Resident of Village-Behharia, Post Office and Police Station-Tekari, District-Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The Bihar State Financial Corporation Fraser Road, Patna through the Chairman cum Managing Director-Dilip Kumar.
2.
The Chairman cum Managing Director, Bihar State Financial Corporation, Fraser Road, Patna -Dilip Kumar.
3.
The Assistant General Manager (Disbursement), Bihar State Financial Corporation, Fraser Road, Patna.
4.
The Deputy Manager in Charge (Zone II), Bihar State Financial Corporation, Fraser Road, Patna-Sanjay Kumar. 5.
The Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, Branch-Tekari, Gaya-Nitin Kumar. 6.
Sri Sidheshwar Yadav, son of Chhotu Yadav, Resident of Village-Bhalua, Post Office-Tekri, District-Gaya (Promoter).
7.
Sri Mithilesh Kumar, Resident of Mohalla-Karsilla, Police Station-Civil Line Gaya, District-Gaya.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sanket, Advocate For the Respondent No. 1 to 4 :
Mr.Nikhil Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For the Respondent No. 5 :
Mr. Nishi Nath Ojha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) 26-04-2024 Learned counsel for the respective parties on instruction submitted that Orders of this Court have been complied.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is not satisfied with the compliance order.
Patna High Court MJC No.2557 of 2022(8) dt.26-04-2024 2/2
3. Be that as it may, the present M.J.C. No. 2557 of 2022 / Contempt petition stands dropped in the light of the Order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 19435 of 2021 decided on 01.02.2022. Accordingly, petitioner is at liberty to question impugned action of the respondent in accordance with law. (P. B. Bajanthri, J) (Alok Kumar Pandey, J) alok/- U