Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Nirmla kumariversusThe State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary,

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The contempt application is disposed, and the petitioner is directed to approach the appropriate authority for release of her salary arrears.

Summary

Nirmla Kumari filed a petition seeking enforcement of a prior High Court order that reinstated her to her post and directed payment of her salary arrears. The State of Bihar submitted a supplementary show‑cause stating that the reinstatement had been effected but the arrears remained unpaid. The Court examined whether the contempt application filed by the petitioner should stand. It held that the petitioner may approach the concerned authority to obtain the pending arrears. Consequently, the contempt application was disposed, granting the petitioner liberty to seek release of her salary arrears.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate disposition of the contempt application filed by the petitioner?
  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to direct enforcement of the order for payment of salary arrears.

Subjects

  • contempt
  • reinstatement
  • salary arrears
  • service law
  • writ jurisdiction

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.95 of 2025
                                                      In
                                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9899 of 2016
                 ======================================================
                 Nirmla Kumari wife of Shrilal Mandal, resident of village- Kariho, P.S. +
                 District- Supaul.

                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna,
                 namely, Shri Amrit Lal Meena.
           2.    The Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar,
                 Patna, namely, Sri Vijay Kumar Verma
           3.    The Secretary, Integrated Child Development Schemes, Government of
                 Bihar, Patna, namely, Sri Vijay Kumar Verma
           4.    The Commissioner, Koshi Division, Saharsa, namely, Shri Dinesh Kumar.
           5.    The District Magistrate, Supaul, namely, Shri Kaushal Kumar.
           6.    The Collector, Supaul, namely, Shri Kaushal Kumar.
           7.    The District Programme Officer, ICDS, Supaul, namely, Smt. Shobha Sinha,
                 District- supaul
           8.    Asha Devi wife of Shri Girish Kumar Paswan resident of village- Kariho,
                 Ward No.6, P.S. and District- Supaul.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :   Mr.Amrit Abhijat, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :   Mr.Government Advocate 7
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   07-05-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   counsel for opposite party No.8 and learned counsel for the

                   State.

                                2. Learned counsel for the State has filed a

                   supplementary show cause stating therein that the order of this

                   Court has already been complied with and the order, which was

                   passed contrary to the order of this Court, has been recalled by
           Patna High Court MJC No.95 of 2025(6) dt.07-05-2026
                                                       2/2




                     the Divisional Commissioner by order dated 10.04.2026 and the

                     petitioner has been reinstated on the post in question and he has

                     also directed to pay the arrears of salary to the petitioner but the

                     arrears of salary of the petitioner has not been paid to her.

                                  3. Petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the

                     authority concerned for release of her arrears of salary.

                                  4. In view of the aforesaid, this contempt application

                     stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.



                                            (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-

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.