Patna High Court
Md. Rajik Husain vs The State Of Bihar on 27 March, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2177 of 2019
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13780 of 2018
======================================================
Md. Rajik Husain Son of Kitab Ali Resident of Village-Mosidha (Bishunpur)
P.O.Choraut, P.S. Pupri (Choraut O.P)., District-Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Through Principal Secretary, Home Department, Bihar,
Patna namely Mr. Amir Subhani.
2. Mr. M. Ramachandrudu District Magistrate, Sitamarhi.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, Advocate
Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Pathak, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Verma, AAG-3
Mr. Suman Kumar Jha, AC to AAG-3
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 27-03-2025
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This contempt petition has been filed alleging
violation of order dated 07.09.2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No.
13780 of 2018, wherein, a relief prayed by the petitioner for
payment of salary for the period from 07.03.2011 to
30.07.2014
, which is the period during which the petitioner
remained under suspension, a direction was given to the
petitioner to file a detailed representation before the District
Magistrate, Sitamarhi and thereafter, the District Magistrate
was directed to consider the case of the petitioner and take
Patna High Court MJC No.2177 of 2019 dt.27-03-2025
decision in accordance with law and if the petitioner is
found to be entitled for salary for the aforesaid period, such
salary shall be paid to the petitioner.
3. Opposite Party No. 2 has filed a show cause and
a supplementary show cause.
4. In paragraph No. 7 of the show cause filed by
Opposite Party No.2, it has been stated that pursuant to the
order dated 07.09.2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13780 of
2018, the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi has passed an order
dated 15.07.2019, whereby payment of full salary to the
petitioner for the period under which he remained
suspended, has been allowed to be paid on the basis of
attendance.
5. Learned advocate for the petitioner, however,
has submitted that despite the aforesaid order of the District
Magistrate, Sitamarhi, the petitioner has not been paid
subsistence allowance/salary.
6. Since, direction passed in the writ petition vide
order dated 07.09.2018 was to take a decision by the
District Magistrate, Sitamarhi, in accordance with law with
regard to the entitlement for subsistence allowance/salary
Patna High Court MJC No.2177 of 2019 dt.27-03-2025
for the period under mentioned and pay the same, if the
petitioner is found to be entitled for the same, I find that the
District Magistrate, Sitamarhi by passing an order dated
15.07.2019 for payment of full salary/subsistence allowance
to the petitioner for the period under which he remained
suspended on the basis of the attendance, has duly complied
with the direction given by this Court in order dated
07.09.2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13780 of 2018 inasmuch
as the direction of this Court in the writ petition vide order
dated 07.09.2018 to the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi was
limited to take the decision in accordance with law and for
payment of salary/ subsistence allowance to the petitioner,
if the petitioner was found to be entitled to be paid the
same.
7. Since the actual payment of the
salary/subsistence allowance for the period under
mentioned is stated to have not reached the petitioner due
to a dispute on attendance of the petitioner for the period
above mentioned, therefore, I am of the view that the same
is entirely a different cause of action which can very well be
agitated by the petitioner in a fresh proceeding that may be
Patna High Court MJC No.2177 of 2019 dt.27-03-2025
initiated, if so advised.
8. Accordingly, this contempt petition shall stand
closed and disposed of with a liberty granted to the
petitioner to agitate the grievances of the petitioner for not
having actually received the salary/subsistence allowance
for the period under reference on account of dispute on the
attendance of the petitioner, if so advised.
(Nani Tagia, J)
Nilmani/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 02.04.2025
Transmission Date N/A
