IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3395 of 2012

======================================================
Pawan Kumar Mandal S/o Shiv Lochan Mandal, Resident of Village
Shanker Lohar, P.S. Baheri, District Darbhanga.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Sri Sanjay Kumar son of not known presently posted as Director in Chief,
Health Services, Bihar, Patna.
3. Sri Veyash Jee, son of not known presently posted as Commissioner cum
Secretary, Health Services, Bihar, Patna.
4. Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh son of not known presently posted as Deputy
Director, Health Services Bihar, Patna.
5. Sri Uday Kumar Chaudhary son of not known presently posted as Civil
Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer, Darbhanga.
6. Sri Surendra Pd. Singh, son of not known presently posted as Incharge
Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre Hayaghat, Darbhanga.
.... .... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Saroj Kumar, Advocate
For Opposite Parties : Mr. Vinay Kriti Singh SC5
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH
ORAL ORDER

8 25-06-2014 On 09.04.2014, this Court had found that there was

gross delay on the part of the Civil Surgeon, Darbhanga in

complying with the orders of this Court and, therefore, he was

directed to file a show cause as to why cost may not be imposed

upon him for delayed compliance thereof causing undue

harassment and expenses to the petitioner in pursuing this

contempt application. He has filed his show cause.

Chronology of the facts shows that the writ application

of petitioner was disposed of on 05.08.2011 by this Court. He filed

his representation in the office of the Civil Surgeon along with a

Patna High Court MJC No.3395 of 2012 (8) dt.25-06-2014

2/4

copy of the order. Show cause filed by him shows that on

02.10.2011 he wrote a letter to the Director-in-Chief, Health

Services vide Annexure-C for instructions in the light of the orders

passed by this Court. Thereafter he did not take further steps in the

matter and obtained a certified copy of the order from the Court on

29.06.2012. Obviously, this step was taken by him after almost

eight months. Even after obtaining certified copy of the order, he

did not do anything for almost two months and wrote another

letter to the Director-in-Chief, Health Services on 24.08.2012

only, vide Annexure-D for instructions and directions for filing

Letters Patent Appeal,. Thereafter it is stated that ‘office’ of the

Civil Surgeon contacted the Additional Advocate General No.2 for

filing Letters Patent Appeal and subsequently he sent statements

of fact and original file to the Director-in-Chief on 30.08.2012.

Thereafter there is no explanation as to why orders were not

passed in compliance to the orders of this Court for about one and

half years.

It is admitted position that no appeal has been filed

against the order of this Court. The contempt application was filed

on 18.07.2012 and after grant of four weeks’ time on 13.12.2012

for filing show cause; the matter was again taken up on

08.01.2014. On that date learned counsel for the opposite parties

Patna High Court MJC No.3395 of 2012 (8) dt.25-06-2014

3/4

prayed for one more accommodation as a last indulgence. The

matter was placed on the next appointed day. On the next day i.e.

on 29.01.2014, it was informed that the show cause was in the

process of being affidavited.

It appears that in the meanwhile, the Director-in-Chief

passed an order on 28.01.2014 i.e. one day before the matter was

taken up, vide Annexure-A, rejecting the claim of petitioner on the

basis of the materials on record but without allowing him to be

heard in the matter. This step was taken by the Director-in-Chief

obviously in a hurry to show compliance of the orders of this

Court. On 26.04.2014, this Court found that notice issued to the

petitioner by him was received later to the date fixed. Hence, he

could not appear. Accordingly, he was directed to appear before

the Civil Surgeon on 06.03.2014, who was directed to hear

petitioner and examine all the materials produced by him and give

a finding in respect of the claim of the petitioner. This was

ultimately done by the Civil Surgeon by his order dated

20.03.2014, as contained in Annexure-B to the supplementary

show cause. By this order, he rejected the claim of petitioner by a

speaking order.

Hence, so far as merit of the case of the petitioner is

concerned, he has to challenge the same in an appropriate

 Patna High Court MJC No.3395 of 2012 (8) dt.25-06-2014

4/4

proceeding in accordance with law. But chronology of the events

shows that only when this Court refused to give further indulgence

to the opposite parties, taking up the matter of petitioner in

January, 2014 i.e. almost two and half years of the order, he

passed an order. The explanation of delay in the show cause of the

Civil Surgeon is not satisfactory. Even if his action mentioned in

paragraph 5 of the show cause is accepted, there is nothing on

record to show nor there is any explanation as to what was the

cause of delay in compliance of the orders of this Court after issue

of letter dated 30.08.2012 and till 28.01.2014.

Hence, this Court finds it a fit case in which cost

should be imposed on the opposite party responsible for delayed

compliance of the orders of this Court and for causing unnecessary

harassment and pecuniary loss to the petitioner in pursuing the

matter for so long. Cost is quantified at Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten

thousand) which shall be paid by the Civil Surgeon to petitioner

from his own salary within one month from the date of

receipt/production of a copy of this order.

This contempt application is disposed of.

(Jayanandan Singh, J)
B.T/-
U T