IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1161 of 2003 PRAMOD KUMAR JHA, S/O- SHRI RAMA KANT JHA, R/O- MOHALLA CHHOTI KHANJARPUR, S.R.B. SURYA ROAD, P.S. BARARI, TOWN AND DISTRICT- BHAGALPUR. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER-CUM- SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ROAD CONSTRUCTION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF-CUM-ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER- CUM-SPECIAL SERCRETARY, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (TRANSPORT), SOUTH BIHAR ZONE, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THR SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, EAST BIHAR CIRCLE, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WEST ROAD DIVISION, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, BHAGALPUR. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, BHAGALPUR DIVISION, BHAGALPUR. For the appellant : Mr. P.K. Jha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, Advocate For the respondent no. 3 : Mr. Udit Narain Singh, Advocate For the respondent no. 5 : Mr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay, Advocate ----------- 5 22.11.2010 The present Letters Patent Appeal arises out of the order passed in I.A. No. 4570/2003 in C.WJ.C. No. 1383 of 2001 wherein a learned Single Judge of this Court has refused to grant additional relief to initiate suo motu contempt proceeding and to lodge criminal case besides payment of cost of litigation and amount of compensation against the respondents who have been brought on record in pursuance of the order passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 6th January, 2004. Records show that on 1.12.2003, a Division Bench of this Court heard the matter in detail and had observed that false 2 affidavits were filed in this Court in the writ proceedings on 19.2.2001, 22.3.2001, 9.7.2002, 15.1.2003, 11.2.2003, 25.1.2003 and 11.2.2003 and accordingly, the Registry issued notice to the said persons concerned and the persons having received notice have appeared through respective counsels. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that earlier the Division Bench had found that the official respondents have sworn false affidavits before this Court and it is a fit case where this Court should took cognizance against them under Chapter XI of the Indian Penal Code, if necessary, in conformity with Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Learned counsel for the State had opposed stating that the amounts which were subject matter of the writ petition had already been paid to the appellant herein and thus no cause of action survives as such in the L.P.A. and is fit to be dismissed. Learned counsel for official respondents pointed out that most of the respondents have retired and they have also been punished by the Department on the departmental proceeding vide notification of the Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar dated 20.3.2006. It is also submitted that a show cause has been filed to the notice given by this Court wherein they have tendered unqualified, unconditional apology before this Court. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court comes to a conclusion that they have committed violation in filing 3 false affidavits. Counsel appearing on behalf of the official respondents have also further submitted that a lenient view perhaps be taken against the official respondent as they have already been retired from service and some of them have been punished by the Department for filing false affidavits and also the fact that the appellant had been paid the principal amount by the Government. Having heard both the sides and having perused the order passed by the Government in reference, this Court is of the opinion that most of the official respondents have already been retired and some of them have been punished by the Department on the departmental proceeding. We are of the opinion that a lenient view may be taken against them accepting the unconditional apology tendered by them by way of show cause. But, however, having taken note of the fact that false affidavits have been filed before this Court as observed by the Division Bench in the order passed in this proceeding on 1.12.2003 and there was delay in making payment to the appellant, for the ends of justice, it would suffice to impose the costs of Rs. 2,000/- each on the official respondents in their personal capacity named in the order dated 1.12.2003 to be paid to the appellant by them respectively The appeal is accordingly disposed of. pkj (T. Meena Kumari,J) ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )