IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
MJC No.2230 of 2011
DHANANJAY SINGH son of Satendra Narayan Singh,
R.O.V Mohalla Patel Nagar, Ward No. 23 P.O.+P.S Daudnagar, Dist-
Aurangabad (Bihar).
.......Petitioner.
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Corporation and House
Department, Bihar Patna namely Mr. Shashi Shekhar Sharma.
3. The District Magistrate, Aurangabad, namely Mr. Abhay Singh.
4. The Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive
officer Nagar Panchayat, Daudnagar, Aurangabad, namely Shri
Niwas Pandey.
5. The Executive officer Nagar Panchayat, Daudnagar, Aurangabad,
namely Nausad Alam.
6. The Executive Engineer, Aurangabad, namely Mr. Satenarayan
Paswan.
7. The Incharage Junior Engineer, Nagar Panchayat, Daudnagar,
Aurangabad, namely Mr. Satenarayan Paswan.
8. The Mukh Parishad, Nagar Panchayat, Daudnagar, Aurangabad,
namely Premanand Paswan...............................Respondents.
---------
For the petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate.
For the State : Ms. Mohini Kumari, A. C to S. C. 14.
For respondent no.5 : Mr. Krishna Kant Tiwari, Advocate.
——-
06/ 17.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the opposite parties.
2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner for
initiating a proceeding of contempt against the opposite parties for
non-compliance of order of this court dated 24.02.2011 by which
CWJC No.24.02.2011 by which CWJC No.1369 of 2011 was
disposed of with a direction to the opposite parties to decide the
application of the petitioner within two months of its filing and if
any dues are found to be admittedly payable the said amount
should be paid by the said respondents immediately thereafter and
if any amount is not found payable to the petitioner, the
-2-
respondents- authorities will be at liberty to reject the claim of the
petitioner and the petitioner would be at liberty to challenge the
same before an appropriate forum.
3. The claim of the petitioner in the MJC petition is that
the said order has not been complied.
4. A show cause has been filed on behalf of opposite
party no.3 stating that the said order has been complied on
06.08.2011 (Annexure-C) when a speaking order had been passed
in compliance of the order of this court. In the said show cause
unqualified apology has been tendered for the delay.
5. A supplementary show cause has been filed by
opposite party no.5 stating that in compliance of the order of this
court dated 24.02.2011 and also in view of order dated 06.08.2011
passed by respondent no.3 cheques have been issued for the
petitioner.
6. Learned counsel for the opposite parties produces
eight cheques of State Bank of India, Daudnagar Branch,
Aurangabad bearing cheque no. 008399 dated 28.06.2011 for an
amount of Rs.14906.00; cheque no.008400 dated 28.06.2011 for
an amount of Rs.44671.00; cheque no.008401 dated 28.06.2011
for an amount of Rs.16932.00; cheque no.008402 dated
28.06.2011 for an amount of Rs.3808.00; cheque no.008403 dated
28.06.2011 for an amount of Rs.26815.00; cheque no.008404
dated 28.06.2011 for amount of Rs.11088.00; cheque no.008419
dated 10.08.2011 for an amount of Rs.95314.00; and cheque
-3-
no.008420 dated 10.08.2011 for an amount of Rs.100.00 totalling
Rs.2,13,629.00 which are handed over by learned counsel for
opposite parties to learned counsel for the petitioner in court by its
permission.
7. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the order of
this court has been substantially complied and accordingly this
petition is disposed of.
8.However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the
aforesaid order dated 06.08.2011 passed by the Collector,
Aurangabad, he will be at liberty to challenge the same before an
appropriate forum as has already been directed by this court vide
order dated 24.02.2011 passed in CWJC no.1369 of 2011.
(S. N. Hussain, J.)
Sunil