Dismissed

Md. Shamsul Haque Ansari v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, P

Patna HC4 Sept 2019MJC/2727/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A contempt proceeding was initiated against the Second Respondent for failing to pay admissible benefits to the petitioner after a previous order. The court found no case for contempt as an authority slip was issued recently, prompting disposal of the application.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of; no contempt proceedings initiated.

Md. Shamsul Haque Ansari Vs The State Of Bihar… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2727 of 2017

¶2

¶3

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19469 of 2015

¶4

======================================================

¶5

Md. Shamsul Haque Ansari Son of Late Md. Safi Ansari, resident of VillageHowa Toli, Post- Pirpainti, Police Station- Pirpainti, District- Bhagalpur.

¶6

... ... Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna

¶9

The Director, Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Prasad

¶10

The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna Mr. Arun Kumar Singh

¶11

¶12

The District Programme Officer, Bhagalpur Mr. Phul Babu Chaudhary

¶13

The District Education Officer, Bhagalpur Mr. Chandra Mohan Mishra.

¶14

The Treasury Officer, Bhagalpur Mr. Manish Kumar.

¶15

... ... Opposite Parties

¶16

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pravina Kumari, Adv. For the State : Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey AAG – 15 For the Accountant General : Mr. Raj Nandan Prasad, Adv. ======================================================

¶17

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶18

4 04-09-2019

¶19

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

¶20

This application under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act read with Section 215 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for initiating a contempt proceeding against the opposite party no.2 for violating the direction of this Court dated 08.03.2017 passed in CWJC No. 19469 of 2015. By the aforesaid order dated 08.03.2017, this Court had directed the petitioner to file a

¶21

Patna High Court MJC No.2727 of 2017(4) dt.04-09-2019 2/3

¶22

representation before the Director, Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna raising his claim within a period of four weeks along with a copy of the order and in case of filing of such a representation, the Director, Secondary Education was required to examine the claim and in case of the claim of the petitioner being found admissible, he was required to issue necessary order directing the competent authority to make payment of admissible amount to the petitioner without any delay.

¶23

A show cause has been filed on behalf of the opposite party no.3 wherein it is stated that the District Programme Officer, Bhagalpur has sent service book and sanction order in respect of the petitioner. On scrutiny of service book it was found that the pay fixation was not approved by the District Accounts Officer, Bhagalpur. Thus, his service book was sent back in original for approval of pay fixation by the District Accounts Officer on 11.12.2018. Thereafter, the respondent no.3 again received the sanction order and service book vide letter no.562 dated 12.07.2019 from the District Programme Officer, Bhagalpur. On receipt of sanction, an authority of revised pension and death-cum-retirement benefits granted in favour of the petitioner has already been issued on 30.08.2019.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.3

¶25

Patna High Court MJC No.2727 of 2017(4) dt.04-09-2019 3/3

¶26

submitted that a copy of the authority slip has also been sent to the petitioner and now there would be no difficulty in payment of the admissible due amount to the petitioner.

¶27

Learned counsel for the State also submitted that once authority slip has been issued in favour of the petitioner, the amount shall be immediately paid to the petitioner.

¶28

In view of the stand taken by the opposite parties, no case for initiation of contempt proceeding is made out. The application is disposed of.

¶29

However, it would be open to the petitioner to approach this Court again in case payment of the admissible amount is not transferred to his account within a reasonable period.

¶30

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

¶31

Pradeep/-

¶32

Md. Shamsul Haque Ansari v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, P

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Shamsul Haque Ansari v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, P

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shankar Mandal Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Excise, Begusarai and Ors.

Niwas Tiwary @ Nivas Tiwari Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Excise, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna and

Rajeev Ranjan Kishore Vs The State of Bihar

Narendra Mohan Singh Vs The State Of Bihar Through Sri R. K. Mahajan, Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government

Brij Bihari Singh Vs Bihar State Financial Corporation, Through Its Managing Director and Ors.

Ajay Prakash Vs the State of Bihar