Dismissed
Akhilesh Kumar Mishra v. The Union Of India and Ors.
Patna HCMJC/3986/2012
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3986 of 2012
====================================================== Akhilesh Kumar Mishra S/O Late Chandra Nand Mishra R/O Village - Kharia Basti, Ward No. 10, P.S. Araria, District - Araria ( Bihar ) .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Union Of India Through Shri R.S. Gujral, The Secretary, Ministry Of Shipping, Surface, Transport And National Highway, New Delhi 2. Shri Puneet Kumar, the Managing Director National Highway Authority of India, New Delhi 3. Shri Raj Kumar Choudhary, the Project Director, National Highway Authority, Araria at Purnea, (Bihar) 4. The State Of Bihar through M. Sharwanan, District Magistrate, District - Araria 5. Quem Ansari, the Competent Officer - Cum District Land Acquisition Officer, Araria, District - Araria .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amar Nath Singh For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sharma, A.C. to PAAG For the NHAI Mr. Sunil KUmar II Mr. Raj Kr. Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 8 05-03-2014 Heard Mr. Amar Nath Singh for the petitioner, counsel for the State and the counsel for the NHIA. A supplementary show cause on behalf of opposite party nos. 4 and 5 has been filed which is taken on record. The application alleges wilful/deliberate disregard/violation of the order dated 07.03.2012 passed in MJC No.2562 of 2011 (Annexure-1) whereby this Court directed as under:-
“Be that as it may, this Court, in the
Patna High Court MJC No.3986 of 2012 (8) dt.05-03-2014
2 / 3
facts and circumstances of the case, directs both the petitioners herein to appear in person before the O.P. No.5 and convince the authorities within a maximum period of three weeks about the aforesaid factum. If the said appropriate competent officer-cum-District Land Acquisition Officer, Araria (O.P. No. 5) is satisfied with the fact that the lands of the present proceeding do not form part of the land(s) against which recovery proceeding has been initiated then the said opposite party shall take appropriate steps to disburse the award amount as per order dated 2.5.2011 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 4949 of 2011 within two weeks therefrom.”
In the second supplementary show cause it has been stated that the remaining amount of the award by different cheques enclosed along with Annexure-D of the said show cause has been paid to and received by the petitioner.
Mr. Amar Nath Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the statutory interest for the delayed payment of the remaining part of the award has not been paid to the petitioner.
In my view, considering the order passed on the contempt application (MJC No. 2565 of 2011), the aforesaid
Patna High Court MJC No.3986 of 2012 (8) dt.05-03-2014
3 / 3
aspect of the matter cannot be delved into in the present jurisdiction of the Court.
If the petitioner is dissatisfied with the payment of the dues, he may ventilate his grievance(s) before the appropriate forum/authority in accordance with law.
The present contempt application merits no further persuasion. It is accordingly dismissed.
Needless to observe that if any such grievance is raised
the same shall receive due consideration of the concerned respondent in accordance with law.
(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J)
HR/-
AKHILESH KUMAR MISHRA
THE UNION OF INDIA
STATE OF BIHAR
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court