Patna High Court
MJC/4134/2018 of Manoj Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar Through Its Chief Secretary Government Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna and Ors on 20 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4134 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9617 of 2017 ====================================================== Manoj Kumar son of Late Ramdeo Paswan, resident of Village- Coal Siding, Post- Mokama Ghat, P.S.- Mokama, District-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4134 of 2018
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9617 of 2017
======================================================
Manoj Kumar son of Late Ramdeo Paswan, resident of Village- Coal Siding, Post- Mokama Ghat, P.S.- Mokama, District- Patna. Presently residing at Mohalla- Grain Shop Para, Ward No. 15, P.S. and P.O. Katihar, District- Katihar.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar Through Its Chief Secretary Government Of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna
2.
Deepak Kumar, Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.
3.
Tripurari Sharan, Principal Secretary, Water Recourses Department, Government of Bihar, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna.
4.
Rajesh Kumar, Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner -cum –
Special Secretary, Flood Control and Water Drainage, Water Resource Department, Government of Bihar, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna.
5.
Arun Kumar, Engineer-in- Chief, Headquarter, Water Resource Department, Bihar, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna
6.
Rakesh Mohan, Joint Secretary, Water Resourses Department, Government of Bihar, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna
7.
Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Joint Secretary Management, Water Recourses Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
8.
Jiwanesh Rajak, Deputy Secretary Management, Water Recourses Department, Government of Bihar, Sinchai Bhawan, Patna.
9.
Awadhesh Kumar Mandal, Under Secretary Management, Water Recourses Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
10.
Sujata Chaturvedi, Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.
11.
Rahul Singh, Secretary Expenditure, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna
12.
Ms. Mani K, Accountant General A and E, Bihar, Patna.
... ... Opposite Parties
Appearance :
For the Petitioner
:
Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Parties
:
Mr. Vinay Kriti Singh, GA2
:
Mr. Rajan Prakash, AC to GA2
For the Accountant General
:
Mr. Arun Kumar Arun, Advocate
======================================================
Patna High Court MJC No.4134 of 2018(6) dt.20-08-2026
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
20-08-2026
1. Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Learned counsel for the respondents.
2. It is fairly submitted by the Learned counsel for the petitioner that the promotional relief has been granted. However, the opposite party-authorities did not consider the benefit of MACP, which is also the part of relief sought by the petitioner in CWJC No. 9617 of 2017. The said Writ petition was disposed of in view of the judgment dated 03.07.2018 passed in CWJC No. 7245 of 2017 in the case of Shankar Bhagwan Prasad Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.
3. On perusal of the judgment dated 03.07.2018 passed in CWJC No. 7245 of 2017, it is evident that only the aspect of promotion was considered by the Court, and nothing was dealt with regarding ACP or MACP. However, the judgment passed in CWJC No. 7245 of 2017 specifically directed the petitioner to make an appropriate application before the authorities for Patna High Court MJC No.4134 of 2018(6) dt.20-08-2026
other benefits.
4. Pursuant to the order of this Court, the petitioner made an application before the authorities, which was rejected. The petitioner has challenged the said rejection by way of CWJC No. 848 of 2022. Therefore, nothing remains for consideration in the present contempt case, as the petitioner has already challenged the same by way of a Writ petition.
5. Therefore, the Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case is hereby closed.
shanu/- (G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J) U