CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench

Md. Jawed Anwar vs State Of Bihar

Patna High Court · Decided on 11 July 2022 · Citation: (2022) 07 PAT CK 0045

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashwani Kumar Singh, J · Dr. Anshuman, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 1994 Of 2016 In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1019 Of 2012
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 353 words
1.

Despite repeated calls, nobody appears for the petitioners.

2.

Mr. Jitendra Kumar, learned counsel appears for the State.

3.

Though, a show cause has been filed on behalf of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Purnea (opposite party No.4), the counsel for opposite party nos. 3 and 4 is not present.

4.

On perusal of the application, it would appear that it has been filed for initiation of contempt proceedings against opposite party nos. 3 and 4 for their willful disobedience and deliberate violation to the order dated 13.10.2015 passed in L.P.A. No.1019 of 2014 whereby a Division Bench of this Court had set aside the order dated 22.04.2014 passed in C.W.J.C. No.25058 of 2013 and the order of termination of nine petitioners by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Purnea was also set aside and the letters patent appeal was allowed.

5.

The opposite party no.4 has categorically stated in his show cause reply that the opposite parties have obeyed the order of this Court passed in L.P.A. No.1019 of 2014 and the petitioners have been retained on their post. In para 5 and 6 to the written show cause reply filed by the opposite party no.4 following averments have been made:

“5. That it is further humbly states here that the petitioners jointly filed a representation along with order dated 09.03.2016 passed in Civil Review No.43 / 2016 before the Municipal Commissioner (Opposite Party No.4)

6.

That after receiving the representation of the petitioners, the answering opposite party no.2 has consider the matter and issued joining letter memo no.932 dated 02.08.2016 to the petitioners and further directed to join them to their respective post and the petitioners have joined and they have been performing their duty since 02.08.2016 as permanent Government Servant.”

5.

Regard being had to the averments made in the written show cause reply, we are of the opinion that since the order passed by this Court has already been complied with, no case for initiation of contempt proceedings against opposite party nos. 3 and 4 is made out.

6.

In that view of the matter, the instant application application is dismissed.