BRISHKETU BIHARI SINHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present contempt application is listed before the Full Bench pursuant to the earlier order passed by the Division Bench of this Court dated 28.04.2016.

(2.) Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties, we are of the opinion that reference to the Full Bench itself is not maintainable. Apart from the fact that no specific question is framed and thereafter referred to the Full Bench, we are of the opinion that the learned Single Judge could not have referred the matter to the Division Bench and thereafter the Division Bench ought not to have referred the matter to the Full Bench. The learned Single Judge as such was deciding the contempt matter in which the non-compliance of the order passed in the writ petition has been alleged. There was no dispute pending before the learned Single Judge on merits whether a statutory interest on the delayed payment of the Provident Fund is required to be paid or not. The learned Single Judge was required to consider whether the order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 12648 of 2012 has been complied with or not.

(3.) In view of the above, the reference to the Full Bench itself is bad. At the cost of repetition, it is to be noted that as such no question is framed and referred to the Full Bench for its decision. Under the circumstances, we remit the matter back to the learned Single Judge to consider the same in accordance with law and on its own merits.