IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.243 of 2006 SHYAM SUNDER JHA Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Nirmal Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite parties : Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Adv. ---------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ----------- Dated, the 8th July, 2008. The grievance of the petitioner in this M.J.C. application is with regard to non-compliance of the order dated 4.11.2003. 2. The Opposite party no.2 has responded to the contempt application by filing the written show cause. It is stated therein, thus: - “3. That the representation of the petitioner was examined by the Khadi Board authority. The petitioner’s dues with regard to his retirement benefits was as follows: - Gratuity - Rs.1,03,803.00 Leave Encashment for 240 days- Rs. 51,408.00 Rs.1,55,211.00 4. That the total amount payable to the petitioner was Rs.1,55,211/- but after examining the amount due against the petitioner in terms of loan of Rs.97,309.22 so the Authority of the Khadi Board adjusted the said amount i.e. Rs.97,309.33 paise and balance mount of Rs.57,901.67 was payable to the - 2 - petitioner, which was paid to the petitioner by cheque No.196035 dated 2.12.2003 by the Board. 5. That there is no any other due with regard to the retiral dues of the petitioner and thus all the dues has finally paid to the petitioner. 6. That Khadi Board is running in a critical financial position and unable to pay the salary of its regular employee in time. 7. That a order was passed on 1.12.2003 vide Memo. No.Pra/1284 dated 2.12.2003 by the Chief Executive Officer (O.P. No.2) in this regard and a copy of the same was also sent to the petitioner.” Xerox copy of the said Memo No. Pra/1284 dated 2.12.2003 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-A to this show cause petition.” 3. Confronted with the aforesaid reply, the only point raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that a sum of Rs.57,901.67 has been wrongly withheld by the Board. The counsel for the Board submits that the said amount came to be adjusted against the loan amount. 4. In this contempt application, this Court will not go into the dispute concerning loan amount and/or payment made by the petitioner against the loan. 5. The order dated 4.11.2003 appears to us to have been complied with and we are satisfied that no further order needs to be passed in this M.J.C. It is disposed of accordingly. This will, however, not preclude the petitioner to raise his grievance with regard - 3 - to wrong adjustment of loan in the sum of Rs.57,901.67 in appropriate proceeding in accordance with law. 6. The M.J.C. is disposed of accordingly. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J Pawan/-