Dismissed¶21

Madhav Prasad Yadav v. Sri K.K. Pathak

Patna HC18 Apr 2025MJC/1802/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1802 of 2024 (out of C.W.J.C. No.3795 of 2018), Dr. Anshuman, J., decided 18-04-2025. Contempt petition regarding compliance with order dated 28.11.2023; State's compliance order Memo No.63/Patna dated 08.01.2024 found insufficient by petitioners; Court declared the contempt petition not maintainable, dropped it, and gave liberty to challenge the compliance order before an appropriate forum.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioners to challenge the order contained in Memo No.63/Patna dated 08.01.2024 before the appropriate forum. ¶21

Madhav Prasad Yadav Vs Sri K.K. Pathak — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1802 of 2024

¶2

¶3

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3795 of 2018

¶4

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

¶5

Madhav Prasad Yadav Son of Late Sifat Lal Yadav Resident of VillageKeotta Patty, P.S.-Kishanpur, District-Supaul

¶6

Kishore Kumar Son of Bholan Yadav Resident of Village-Sukhasan, P.S.Kishanpur, District-Supaul.

¶7

... ... Petitioner/s

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sri K.K. Pathak not Known to the Petitioner Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶10

Sri K. K. Pathak not known to the Petitioner Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶11

Sri B. Kartikey Dhanji, Director, not Known to the Petitioenr, Bihar Education Project Council, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶12

Sri Anil Kumar not Known to the Petitioner Director, Mass Education, Government of Bihar.

¶13

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶14

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Girijish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Akash Anand, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

¶15

6 18-04-2025 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioners and

¶16

Learned Counsel for the State.

¶17

Counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are in contempt.

¶18

Counsel for the State submits that in compliance of order dated 28.11.2023 in C.W.J.C. No.3795 of 2018 passed by this Hon’ble Court, respondents authorities have passed order contained in Memo No.63/Patna dated 08.01.2024, but by the

¶19

Patna High Court MJC No.1802 of 2024(6) dt.18-04-2025 2/2

¶20

said order, petitioners are still aggrieved.

¶21

In the opinion of the Court, the present contempt petition is not maintainable. As such, the order contained in Memo No.63/Patna dated 08.01.2024 is hereby dropped granting liberty to the petitioners to challenge the same before appropriate forum.

¶22

(Dr. Anshuman, J.)

¶23

Prakashmani/-

¶24

Madhav Prasad Yadav v. Sri K.K. Pathak

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhav Prasad Yadav v. Sri K.K. Pathak

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shashi Priya Verma Vs The State of Bihar

Manohar Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Nilkamal Devi Vs Rajesh Upadhyay @ Rajesh Kumar Upadhayay

Arvind Yadav @ Aravinda Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Sharat Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Munni Kumari Vs Mr. Amir Subhani