Patna High Court - Orders
Dinesh Kumar Sharma vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 9 July, 2013
Author: Ahsanuddin Amanullah
Bench: Ahsanuddin Amanullah
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3205 of 2012
In
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1064 of 2009
======================================================
Dinesh Kumar Sharma S/O Ramjap Sharma R/O Village - Shitalpur, P.S.
Dighwara, District - Saran ( Chapra ) At Present Resident Of Jagannath
Singh Lane, Choudhary Tola, P.S. Sultanganj, Town & District - Patna
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Abhayanand Son Of Late Jagdanand, Director General Of Polce, Bihar,
Patna
.... .... Opp. Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Utsav Kumar, Advocate
For the Opp. Party/s : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar, AC to AAG 14
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. HUSSAIN
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. HUSSAIN)
5 09-07-2013Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner for initiating a proceeding of contempt against the opposite parties for alleged wilful and deliberate violation of order of this Court dated 14.02.2012 passed in M.J.C. No. 1064 of 2009 by which a direction was given to the petitioner to file a representation along with a copy of the said order whereafter the respondent authorities Patna High Court MJC No.3205 of 2012 (5) dt.09-07-2013 2/2 were directed to dispose of the said representation in accordance with law within three months from the date of its filing.
3. A show cause has been filed on behalf of the opposite party stating that the said order has been complied. The representation of the petitioner has been decided by the authorities on 13.03.2013. They have also tendered their unqualified apology for the delay.
4. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid order is not in accordance with law as the specific order was to consider the grievance of the petitioner by the authorities concerned.
5. The order may be good, bad or different but this Court in its contempt jurisdiction cannot go into the merit of the same and the petitioner will be at liberty to challenge it before the appropriate forum.
6. With the aforesaid observation, this petition is disposed of.
(S.N. Hussain, J) (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Anjani/-