Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Muzaffar MahmoodversusThe State Of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
WITHDRAWN

Holding

The petition was dismissed as withdrawn.

Summary

The petitioner, Muzaffar Mahmood, filed a writ petition seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against several officials of the Bihar government for allegedly failing to comply with an order dated 01‑03‑2017 in CWJC No.1598 of 2017. The petition alleged deliberate and intentional non‑compliance by the opposite parties. During the hearing on 09‑04‑2026, the petitioner’s counsel requested to withdraw the petition. The court entertained the request and allowed the withdrawal. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to contempt proceedings against the opposite parties for non‑compliance with the order dated 01‑03‑2017

Subjects

  • contempt of court
  • civil writ jurisdiction
  • withdrawal of petition
  • non‑compliance with court order

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2081 of 2017
                                                       In
                                 Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1598 of 2017
                 ======================================================
                 Muzaffar Mahmood Son of late Mahmudul Amin, Resident of Mohalla-
                 Amlapatti, Near Urdu Library , Ward No. 10, P.S.- Motihari Town, Motihari,
                 District- East Champaran, Motihari.

                                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
           1.    The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Sri Arvind Kumar
                 Choudhary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
           2.    The District Magistrate0Sri Anupam Kumar), East Champaran, Motihari.
           3.    The Chairman(Smt Priyanka Jaiswal), Zila Parisad, East Champaran,
                 Motihari.
           4.    The District Development Commissioner Cum Chief Executive Officer(Shri
                 Sunil Kumar Yadav), Zila Parisad, East Champaran, Motihari.
           5.    The District Engineer(Ojair Ahmad), Zila Parisad, East Champaran,
                 Motihari.
           6.    The Assistant Engineer(Sri Suresh Prajapati), Zila Parisad, East Champaran,
                 Motihari.
           7.    The Junior Engineer(Rajesh Kumar), Zila Parishad, East Champaran,
                 Motihari.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :    Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :    Mr. Pushkar Narain Shahi, Advocate
                 For the Zila Parishad    :    Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   09-04-2026                    Heard the parties.

                                2. The present petition has been preferred for the

                   grant of following relief(s):

                                                “for initiation of contempt proceeding

                                      and for punishment to opposite parties as they

                                      deliberately, knowingly and intentionally have
            Patna High Court MJC No.2081 of 2017(4) dt.09-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                                         failed to comply the order dated 01.03.2017

                                         passed in CWJC No. 1598 of 2017 by the

                                         Hon’ble Court.”


                                   3. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is

                      allowed to withdraw the petition.

                                   4. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed as

                      withdrawn.



                                                     (Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-

U


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.