IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.799 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22098 of 2013 ====================================================== Sharad Pankaj, male, aged about 44 years, S/O- Dr. Arbind Mehtha Resident Of Mohalla Malighat, P.S. Mithanpura, District Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Education(Human Resources), Government of India, New Delhi 2. R. Subrahmanyam, the Secretary Department of Education(Human Resources), Government of India, New Delhi 3. Mr. Prof. Parameshwara Narayan Shastry, the Vice-Chancellor Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan, 56/57 Industrial Area, Janakpuri, New Delhi 4. Mr. Prof. S. Subrahmanya Sarma, the Registrar Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan, 56/57 Industrial Area, Janakpuri, New delhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nityanand Mishra, Advocate Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kanak Verma, CGC ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA ORAL ORDER 2 02-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of the order dated 02.08.2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 22098 of 2013, whereby this Court while observing that the grievance of the petitioner is misutilization of fund allocated by Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan, the writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to agitate the matter before the Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan as to misutilization of fund allocated for payment of the Patna High Court MJC No.799 of 2019(2) dt.02-04-2025 2/2 petitioner. 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the petitioner has submitted a representation to as many as five authorities including authorities of Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan vide letter dated 21.08.2018, whereby the petitioner has prayed for payment of salary with effect from 01.04.1997. 4. Under the aforesaid circumstances, I find that the direction in the writ petition being limited to grant of liberty to the petitioner to agitate the matter before the Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan regarding misutilization of fund allocated and thereby the petitioner having agitated the matter by filing a representation dated 21.08.2018 to various authorities including the authorities of Rastriya Sanskrit Sansthan, I find that there is no case of contempt made out against the opposite parties. 5. In that view of the matter, the contempt petition stands closed and disposed off. Nilmani/- (Nani Tagia, J) U