← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/5106/2018disposed

Mohammad Altaf Husain@ Mohammed Aftab Husain v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2023-06-23Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.5106 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4660 of 2018 ====================================================== Mohammad Altaf Husain@ Mohammed Aftab Husain s/o Md. Hanif Ansari @ Hanif Miya Resident of Village-Baraudhiya,P.S. Simultallah,Dist.-Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors through the Principal Secretary,Education Department,Govt. of Bihar,New Secretariat,Patna nemely R.K. Mahajan,son of not known to the petitioner.

2.

R.K. Mahajan., Son of not known to the petitioner,the Principal Secretary,Education Department,Govt. of Bihar,New Secretariat,Patna 3.

Shyam Narayan Singh, Son of not known to the petitioner,the District Programme Officer(Establishment),Jamui 4.

Vijay Kumar Himanshu, Son of not known to the petitioner,the District Education Officer,JAMUI 5.

Shyam Sundar Singh, Son of not Known to the Petitioner,the Block Education Officer,Jhajha,Dist.-Jamui ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shashi Shekhar Tiwary, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 23-06-2023 Heard the parties.

For compliance of order dated 15.03.2018 in CWJC No.4660 of 2018 the present petition has been filed. As per the order the respondents were directed to act in accordance with law and to issue necessary order for payment of arrears and current salary.

A show-cause has been filed on behalf of the opposite party no.3 by which the memo no.198 dated 06.02.2019 passed

Patna High Court MJC No.5106 of 2018(7) dt.23-06-2023 2/2 by the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Jamui has been annexed as Annexure-A which shows that a reasoned order has been passed negating the claim of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, the contempt petition stands disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to challenge the same, if he so wants in a writ court.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Prakash Narayan /- U