High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Ram Raksha Prasad vs State Of Bihar & Ors. on 22 September, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Ram Raksha Prasad vs State Of Bihar & Ors. on 22 September, 2011
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                      Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.344 of 2010
                    Ram Raksha Prasad, S/O Dharmdeo Pd., R/O Vill-
                    Karna/P.O. Sewtar, P.S-Hasua, Distt- Nawada, At
                    Present living In Kanchanbag, Near Project Girl's
                    School, Hasua Distt- Nawada
                                                    ---Petitioner
                                           Versus
                    1.

The State Of Bihar, through Principal Secretary,
Human Resources Development Department, Govt.
Of Biahr, Patna

2. Anjani Kumar Singh, Principal Secretary, Govt. Of
Bihar, H.R.D. Deprtment, Vikas Bhawan, Patna

3. Mr. Ashutosh, Dirctor, Primary Eduation, H.R.D.
Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Vikas Bhawan, Patna

4. Ram Sakal Singh, District Superintendent of
Education, Nawada

5. Sailesh Kumar, District Provident Fund Officer,
Nawada.

—Opposite Parties

4. 22.9.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

Separate show cause has been filed on behalf of

opposite parties no.4 and 5.

Learned counsel for the State submits that the order of

this Court has been complied with by passing the necessary

orders, as contained in Annexure A to the show cause filed on

behalf of opposite party no.4 as also Annexure A to the show

cause filed on behalf of opposite party no.5.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, however,

submits that the order, as contained in Annexure A with respect to

the payment of interest, is not correct as the same has not been

paid correctly as well as the amount of Rs.15,038/- as mentioned

in paragraph 3 of the letter, as contained in Annexure A to the

show cause filed on behalf of opposite party no.4 has not been
-2-

paid although no reply affidavit has been filed on behalf of the

petitioner.

Be that as it may, since the order of this Court has been

complied with, this contempt application need not proceed further.

The same stands disposed of.

However, if the aforesaid amount has not been paid, it

will be open for the petitioner to bring it to the notice of the

District Superintendent of Education, Nawada (opposite party

no.4), who will verify the same and if it is found that the said

amount has not been paid, the same shall be paid without delay.

PNM                                     (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)