Disposed

Bishundeo Prasad v. State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC20 Nov 2013MJC/1524/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt application arising from a writ petition regarding salary denial, the Court noted that the petitioner's evidence regarding appointment and work was rejected as not genuine by the State in the writ proceedings. The Court held that this factual dispute cannot be adjudicated herein.

What did the court decide?

Contempt application disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to take steps in an appropriate proceeding.

Bishundeo Prasad Vs State of Bihar and Ors. — Contempt of Court | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1524 of 2010

¶2

====================================================== Bishundeo Prasad son of Sheo Nandan Singh resident of village Pir Bigha, P.S. Khodaganj, District Nalanda.

¶3

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. State Of Bihar through the Director, Health Services, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. Dr. Shatrughan Prasad Singh, the Director, Health Services, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶4

Dr. Kumar Adesh Chandra Shrivastava, the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Jehanabad,

¶5

.... .... Respondent/s

¶6

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajanan Arun Mr. Manoj Kumar Upadhya

¶7

For the Respondent/s : Mr. (Ga1)

¶8

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶9

Pursuant to the earlier order of this Court, the records were produced by the learned counsel for the State which have been perused by this Court.

¶10

18 20-11-2013

¶11

Pursuant to the order of this Court in the writ application, petitioner had filed a representation enclosing a copy of the order passed in the writ application as well as a copy of the writ application with annexures. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner subsequently filed some other papers also before the respondents. However, from the show cause it is apparent that the first representation filed by the petitioner pursuant to the order of this Court has been considered and the documents produced along with the same i.e. annexures in

¶12

Patna High Court MJC No.1524 of 2010 (18) dt.20-11-2013

¶13

¶14

the writ application, were considered and have not been found to be genuine. Hence, the petitioner has been denied the salary as claimed by him. Since the factum of appointment and working of the petitioner has been denied by the opposite party, the petitioner has to challenge the same in an appropriate proceeding in accordance with law. The issue cannot be considered in a contempt application.

¶15

This contempt application is, accordingly, disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to take steps in accordance with law in an appropriate proceeding.

¶16

(Jayanandan Singh, J)

¶17

Amin/-

Bishundeo Prasad v. State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bishundeo Prasad v. State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sita Ram Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Manoj Kumar Pandey Vs the Union of India and Ors.

M/S Krishna Furniture House Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Shyama Devi Vs The Life Insurance Corporation Of India and Ors.

Amir Fatima Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sanjay Agrawal Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.