Chandradoe Sharma vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 3857 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
              Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2287 of 2017
                                       In
                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5959 of 1993
======================================================

Chandradoe Sharma S/o Late Bindeshwari Sharma, Resident of House no. 13/3R (Rental), Harmu Housing Colony, Harmu Chawk, P.O. Harmu, P.S.- Harmu Argora, District-Ranchi (Jharkhandi) ... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar 1(a). The State of Bihar

2. Sri Anjani Kumar Singh, the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. Dr. S. Sidharth, Principal Secretary, Industries Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. Smt. Sujata Chaturvedi, Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

5. Smt. Sujata Chaturvedi, the Chairman, Lok Udham Beuro, with Finance, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

6. Sri Amir Subhani, Principal Secretary, Samanya Prashan Vibhag (Karmik), Bihar, Patna.

7. Pankaj Kumar, Director of Industries, Govt. of Bihar, Panta.

8. Shaket Kumar, Director, Handloom and Sericulture, Industries Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

9. Sri Ranjeet Kumar, Deputy Secretary, Industries Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

10. B.N. Parasad, Managing Director, Bihar State Handloom and Handicraft Corporation Ltd., Udyog Bhawan, East Gandhi Maidan, Patna, Bihar.

11. S. Suresh Kumar, Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar No. 1, Adv.

For the State          :        Mr. Shankar Kumar, AC to AAG 7
For the C              :        Dr. Anand Kumar, Adv.

======================================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 18-08-2023

Heard Mr. Arun Kumar No.1, learned counsel

appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the Bihar State

Handloom and Handicraft Corporation Limited (hereinafter

referred to as the 'Corporation') is represented by Dr. Anand

Kumar, learned counsel. The State is represented by Mr. Patna High Court MJC No.2287 of 2017 dt.18-08-2023

Shankar Kumar, learned counsel.

2. The present petition has been filed for initiating a

contempt proceeding against the authorities of the Corporation

on account of non-compliance of the order of this Court dated

19.03.1996 passed in CWJC No. 5959 of 1993.

3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that as

the petitioner had since been suffering from mental illness and

as such delay has caused in approaching this Court. However,

as a special case this Court would consider to pass appropriate

order for compliance of the order of this Court.

4. He fairly submits that in compliance of the order

of this Court, the Managing Director of the Corporation has

passed the order as contained in Memo No. 26 dated

18.02.1997 (Annexure-4). From perusal thereof, it appears that

the petitioner has been found entitle for the benefits claimed

for, but despite his entitlement, he has not been allowed all the

benefits.

5. At this juncture, learned counsel representing the

Corporation submits that the Corporation went in liquidation

and thereafter claim of all the employees has been settled

pursuant to the direction of the Hon'ble Apex Court. He further

submits that the person whose claims have not been settled Patna High Court MJC No.2287 of 2017 dt.18-08-2023

they have approached before this Court and this Court in

CWJC No. 387/2020, 7615, 7680, 7683/2020 vide order dated

08.03.2021 directed the Corporation to ensure payment of the

remaining employees of the Corporation. In light of the order

of this Court, a press communique has been issued in the daily

newspaper and a request has been made to the concerned

employees to submit their service record/relevant document in

order to consider the grievance of the concerned employees. In

the notice, by way of press communique, the name of the

petitioner stands at serial number 77. He further submits that if

the petitioner would file a fresh representation in light of the

aforenoted press communique along with the relevant

record/document his case would be considered and if any

amount is still found due, the same would be paid within a

reasonable period of three months.

6. In view of the submissions made on behalf of the

parties, the present contempt petition stands disposed of with a

liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the

Managing Director of the Corporation in terms of the

aforenoted communique within a period of four weeks.

7. Needless to observe that if such representation is

filed within the period prescribed, the claim of the petitioner Patna High Court MJC No.2287 of 2017 dt.18-08-2023

would be considered sympathetically and if found entitled, the

same must be allowed in his favour.

(Harish Kumar, J)

Anjani/-

AFR/NAFR                N.A.
CAV DATE                N.A.
Uploading Date          19.08.2023
Transmission Date       N.A.