Basudeo Prasad Poddar, vs The State of Bihar — MJC/3379/2019
Case under Contempt of Courts Act Section 11,12. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 07th May 2026.
CNR: BRHC010853542019
Filing Number
MJC/27579/2019
Filing Date
17-Aug-2019
Registration No
MJC/3379/2019
Registration Date
17-Aug-2019
Judge
Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy
Coram
Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy
Bench Type
Single Bench
Judicial Branch
Judicial Section
Decision Date
07-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 01-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Basudeo Prasad Poddar,
Adv. Amrendra Kumar
Respondent(s)
-
1.The State of Bihar
-
2....................., Director (Primary Education),
-
3.Binay Chandra Deo, the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Koshi Division,
-
4.Sanjay Kumar, District Superintendent of Education, Katihar,
-
5.Deo Bind Kumar Singh, District Education Establishment Committee
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-May-2026
Mr. Justice Rajiv RoyView PDF
The Patna High Court disposed of Basudeo Prasad Poddar's contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of a July 2018 order, after the opposite parties submitted evidence that the District Programme Officer, Katihar had passed an order in the petitioner's favor and payment had already been cleared. The court granted the petitioner liberty to agitate the matter if grievance still remains. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
30-Oct-2025
For Admission -I
Mr. Justice Nani Tagia
-
21-Jul-2025
For Admission -I
Mr. Justice Nani Tagia
-
18-Jul-2025
For Admission -I
Mr. Justice Nani Tagia
-
17-Jul-2025
For Admission -I
Mr. Justice Nani Tagia
-
16-Jul-2025
For Admission -I
Mr. Justice Nani Tagia
-
19-Nov-2019
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
17-Aug-2019
Case filed
Registration No. MJC/3379/2019
The Patna High Court disposed of Basudeo Prasad Poddar's contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of a July 2018 order, after the opposite parties submitted evidence that the District Programme Officer, Katihar had passed an order in the petitioner's favor and payment had already been cleared. The court granted the petitioner liberty to agitate the matter if grievance still remains. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts