Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Dharmendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar and Ors

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The issuance of Memo No. 353 satisfied the earlier order, so no contempt occurred and the petition is dismissed.

Summary

The petitioner, Dharmendra Kumar, filed a contempt petition alleging non‑compliance with the order dated 28‑06‑2017 in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3972 of 2016. The State of Bihar and officials of the Bihar State Food Corporation (BSFC) contended that they had complied by issuing Memo No. 353 dated 08‑04‑2025, directing the petitioner to pay Rs 4,94,410 with 18% compound interest. The High Court examined whether the issuance of the memo satisfied the earlier court order. Finding that the memo was a reasoned order and thus fulfilled the compliance requirement, the Court held that there was no contempt. Consequently, the contempt petition was dismissed, but the petitioner was given liberty to challenge the memo itself if desired.

Issues considered

  • Did the issuance of Memo No. 353 dated 08‑04‑2025 constitute compliance with the order dated 28‑06‑2017 in C.W.J.C. No. 3972 of 2016?
  • Is the petitioner entitled to relief on the ground of contempt of court?

Subjects

  • contempt of court
  • compliance with court order
  • Bihar State Food Corporation
  • civil writ jurisdiction
  • interest calculation
  • memo order

Judgment

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.671 of 2019
                                                       In
                                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3972 of 2016
                  ======================================================
                  Dharmendra Kumar Son of Sri Suresh Prasad Yadav, resident of Mohalla-
                  Babu Tola, Near Block Office, Police Station- Banka, District- Banka.

                                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
            1.    The State of Bihar
            2.    Mr. Kundan Kumar, the Collector, Banka.
            3.    Lal Babu Rajak, the District Manager, State Food Corporation, Banka.
            4.    Mr. Manoj Kumar Choudhary, the Certificate Officer, Banka.
            5.    Dr. Sanjay Kumar, the Additional Collector, Banka.
            6.    Mr. Vikash Kumar, the Block Development Officer, Fullidumer, Banka.

                                                         ... ... Opposite Party/s
                  ======================================================
                  Appearance :
                  For the Petitioner/s    :      Mr. Najmul Hodda
                  For the State           :      Mr. S. Raza Ahmad, AAG-5
                  For the BSFC            :      Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
                                          :      Mr. Utkarsh Utpal, Advocate
                  ======================================================
                  CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
                                        ORAL ORDER

10   07-04-2026                      Heard the parties.

                                  2. The learned counsel for the BSFC submits that in

                    compliance of the order dated 28.06.2017 passed in C.W.J.C.

                    No. 3972 of 2016, The District Manager, Bihar State Food

                    Corporation has passed the order contained in Memo No. 353

                    dated 08.04.2025, wherein the petitioner has been directed to

                    make payment of Rs. 4,94,410/- along with 18% compound

                    interest.

                                  3. This Court finds that the opposite parties have

                    complied the order dated 28.06.2017 passed in C.W.J.C. No.
          Patna High Court MJC No.671 of 2019(10) dt.07-04-2026
                                                      2/2




                    3972 of 2016, in as much as vide Memo No. 353 dated

                    08.04.2025, the reasoned order has been passed.

                                 4. Accordingly, the present contempt petition is

                    dismissed with a liberty to the petitioner to assail the office

                    order contain in Memo No. 353 dated 08.04.2025, if so desires.



                                                (Ritesh Kumar, J)
AjayMishra/-

U


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

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