Patna High Court
Hitech HealthcareversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner’s grievance was already redressed and therefore no further order, including a mandamus, was required.
Summary
Hitech Healthcare, represented by its proprietor Bishnudeo Thakur, filed a writ of mandamus seeking the return of two demand drafts of Rs.50,000 each that were deposited as security money for a government tender. The petitioner alleged that despite repeated requests over nine years, the respondents had not returned the security money with statutory interest. Respondent No.6 submitted a counter‑affidavit stating that the demand drafts had already been returned on 12‑09‑2025 and acknowledged by the petitioner. The Court examined the affidavit, concluded that the petitioner’s grievance was already satisfied and that the bank was not a party to the proceedings. Consequently, the Court held no further order was necessary and disposed of the writ application, leaving the petitioner free to pursue any separate remedy against the bank.
Issues considered
- Whether the Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to return the security money with interest.
- Whether the petitioner’s grievance has already been redressed by the return of the demand drafts.
- Whether the bank that issued the demand drafts should be made a party to the writ proceedings.
Subjects
- mandamus
- security deposit
- government tender
- writ jurisdiction
- grievance redressed
- bank
- return of money
- civil writ
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14811 of 2025
======================================================
Hitech Healthcare through its Proprietor Bishnudeo Thakur, Male, aged
about-66 years, S/o Late Jatadhar Thakur, Resident of Ward No. 35, Mohalla-
Ayachinagar Benta, P.O.- D.M.C., P.S.- Laheriasarai, District- Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Dept. of Health,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Dept. of Health, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Bihar Health Society, Sheikhpura, Patna its Director.
4. The Director, Bihar Health Society, Sheikhpura, Patna.
5. The Administrator, Bihar Health Society, Sheikhpura, Patna.
6. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ugranath Mallik, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Raghwanand, GA-11
Mr. Rajnish Shandilya, AC to GA-11
For the Bihar Health Society : Dr. Anand Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Tooba Hera, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)
5 29-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Following is the relief sought for in the present writ
application:-
“1. That this is an application for
issuance of a writ of mandamus
directing/commanding the respondents to return the
security money to the petitioner by which the
petitioner deposited the amount through demand
Patna High Court CWJC No.14811 of 2025(5) dt.29-04-2026
2/3
draft bearing D.D. No. 095438 dated 10-05-2016 of
Central Bank of India of Rs. 50000/- and also
bearing D.D. No. 083850 dated 06-06-2018 of Axis
Bank of Rs. 50000/- for the financial year 2016-17
and 2018-19 as per Technical Tender Vide Tender
Invitation Published in Hindi daily News Paper
Jagaran dated 01.05.2015 and Prabhat Khabar dt.
18.05.2018 for the supply of Medicine, Surgical
goods & Machine Equipments etc. for the year
2018-19 and 2019-20 vide tender enquiry No. PR-
2033 (Health) 2018-19. The same has been paid to
the petitioner with statutory interest because since 9
years petitioner requested the respondents Authority
to return his security money but till date no action
taken by the respondent authority and for issuance
of any other appropriate writ/writs,
direction/directions, order/s by which the petitioner
may be found entitled to.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
grievance against the respondent authority stands redressed;
however, the concerned bank has not made the payments. It is,
therefore, prayed that liberty be granted to file a fresh
application against the bank.
4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of
Respondent No. 6, wherein following statement has been made:-
“9. That in compliance of the order
dated 10-09-2025 the answering respondent has
returned the demand draft bearing no. 095438 dated
10-05-2016 and 083850 dated 06-06-2018 of Rs.
50,000/- each on 12-09-2025 to the person
Patna High Court CWJC No.14811 of 2025(5) dt.29-04-2026
3/3
authorized by the proprietor Hitech Healthcare and
he acknowledge receiving of demand draft over
Letter No. 2479 dated 11-09-2025.”
5. Upon perusal of the aforesaid statement, it appears
that the grievance of the petitioner has already been redressed
and the bank has not been made party in this case.
6. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the view
that no further order is required to be passed in the present writ
application.
7. Accordingly, the present writ application stands
disposed of.
8. If so advised, the petitioner shall be at liberty to
take appropriate legal recourse available to him against the
bank.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
(Shailendra Singh, J)
Sachin/-
U
Checking your session…