Patna High Court
Nagendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The Court held that the opposite parties had complied with the order, and therefore the contempt application was dismissed.
Summary
Petitioner Nagendra Kumar filed a contempt application alleging that the State of Bihar and its agencies had not complied with the High Court's order dated 19 December 2022, which directed the refund of Rs. 3,08,36,815 without interest and required the petitioner to approach Respondent No.10 (Bihar State Mining Corporation Ltd.) within two weeks. The opposite parties filed a show‑cause response stating that they had refunded the entire amount by RTGS on 16 January 2023 without any deductions and had also deposited the remaining amounts (income tax, District Mineral Foundation, GST, and stamp duty) with the respective authorities. The Court examined the show‑cause statement, found that the directions of the earlier order had been fully complied with, and concluded that no further order was necessary. Consequently, the contempt application was disposed of, with the Court indicating that the petitioner could file a fresh writ if aggrieved. All pending applications, if any, were also ordered to stand disposed of.
Issues considered
- Did the opposite parties comply with the High Court's order dated 19‑12‑2022 directing refund of the deposited amount without interest?
- Should the contempt proceedings be continued or dismissed based on the compliance?
Subjects
- contempt
- civil writ jurisdiction
- refund
- mining
- District Mineral Foundation
- GST
- income tax
- stamp duty
- compliance
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.428 of 2023
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11600 of 2022
======================================================
Nagendra Kumar, Son of Mudrika Rai, Resident of New Gosai Tola,
Sultanpur Road, Dr. D. Ram, DAV Public Schol, Ward No.20, Danapur
Khagaul, P.O. and P.S.-Danapur, District-Patna 801503, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Smt. Harjot Kaur Bamhrah Principal Secretary,
Mines and Geology Department, Government of Bihar, Vikas Bhawan,
Bailey Road, Patna.
2. Smt. Harjot Kaur Bamhrah, The Principal Secretary cum Mines
Commissioner, Mines and Geology Department, Government of Bihar,
Vikas Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
3. Sri Ghanshyam Jha, The Assistant Director, Mines and Geology Department,
Government of Bihar, Vikas Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
4. Sri Shailendra, The Engineer in Chief, Flood Control and Drainage, Water
Resources Department, Government of Bihar.
5. Sri Pradeep Kumar Sinha, the Chief Engineer, Flood Control and Drainage,
Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar.
6. Sri Gautam Kumar, The Executive Engineer, Flood Control and Drainage,
Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar.
7. Dr. Chandrashekhar Singh, the Collector cum District Magistrate, Patna.
8. Sri Kumar Gaurav, The District Mining Officer, Patna.
9. Sri Kumar Gaurav, The Mineral Development Officer, Patna.
10. Bihar State Mining Corporation Limited through Sri Asangba Chuba Ao,
General Manager, Room No.164, Vikas Bhawan (New Secretariat), Bailey
Road, Patna 800015.
11. Sri Shivendra Kumar Verma, The Authorised Officer, Bihar State Mining
Corporation Limited, Room No.164, Vikas Bhawan (New Secretariat),
Bailey Road, Patna 800015.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Suraj Samdarshi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Avinash Shekhar, Advocate
Ms. Simran Kumari, Advocate
Ms. Abhilasha Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Gyan Prakash Ojha, GA-7
For the Mines : Mr. Naresh Dikshit, Spl.PP
Ms. Shriti Singh, Advocate
Mr. Utkarsh Pathak, Advocate
Patna High Court MJC No.428 of 2023(3) dt.24-04-2026
2/4
For they BSMC Ltd. : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey, Advocate
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)
3 24-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present contempt application has been filed
alleging non-compliance of the order dated 19.12.2022 passed
in CWJC No. 11600 of 2022, operative portion of which reads
as follows:
“Nonetheless, the petitioner would be entitled
for refund of the amount but without any interest
whatsoever.
After having said so, we direct the petitioner to
approach the Respondent No.10 for the needful within a
period of two weeks. On such request made by the
petitioner, necessary directions shall be issued by the
concerned respondent and the tender money with
necessary deductions shall be returned to the petitioner.
As we have noted above, the petitioner shall not
insist for any interest on such payment..
3. A show cause has been filed on behalf of Opposite
Party Nos. 1 to 3 & 8 to 11, wherein following statements have
been made:
“10. That it is humbly submitted that in compliance of
the directions passed by this Hon'ble Court in the order
dated 19.12.2022, the concerned opposite party
refunded the amount deposited i.e. Rs. 3,08,36,815/- by
Patna High Court MJC No.428 of 2023(3) dt.24-04-2026
3/4
the Petitioner vide RTGS dated 16.01.2023 without any
deductions whatsoever. The said fact is detailed
hereinbelow:
11. Head Amount Deduction Amount
S.No. Deposited by the Refunded to
Petitioner Petitioner
1. Mining 1,99,63,722/- 0 1,99,63,722/-
Fee
2. EMD 1,08,73,093/- 0 1,08,73,093/-
Total 3,08,36,815/-
12. That it is most essential to mention here that the
remaining amount deposited by the Petitioner was
under the following heads:
a) Income Tax Rs. 4,11,253/-
b) District Mineral Foundation (DMF)- 3,99,275/-
c) Goods and Services Tax (GST)-35,93,470/-
d) Stamp Duty- 11,97,824.
13. That it is submitted that the concerned opposite
party has already deposited the amounts under the
heads of the Income Tax and the GST with the
concerned Departments. Furthermore, The DMF
amount has also been submitted by the Respondent
BSMCL with the District Mining Office, Bhojpur.
Further, the stamp duty has also been deposited with the
concerned District Registration Office. Therefore, the
perusal of the aforesaid would make it evident that no
amount, deposited by the petitioner herein, is pending
with the respondent BSMCL as on date.”
4. Upon perusal of the aforesaid, it appears that the
directions issued by the Division Bench has already been
complied with.
Patna High Court MJC No.428 of 2023(3) dt.24-04-2026
4/4
5. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the view
that no further order is required to be passed in the present
contempt application.
6. Accordingly, the present contempt application
stands disposed of.
7. If so advised, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file
a fresh writ application in accordance with law, if aggrieved by
the act of the opposite parties.
8. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Sudhir Singh, J)
(Shailendra Singh, J)
Sujit/-
U
Checking your session…