IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2847 of 2010 1. HARIHARNATH JHA S/O LATE BRAJ BANSHI JHA PRESENTLY POSTED AS DSE, PURNIA, GOVT. QUARTERS NO. 2, SIPAHI TOLA, SHIKSHA COLONY, P.S. K.HAAT, DISTT.- PURNIA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA 2. K.C.SAHA S/O NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER THE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, OLD SECRETARIAT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. ANJANI KUMAR SINHA S/O NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA 4. ANIL KUMAR VERMA S/O NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER DIRECTOR, ADMINISTRATION CUMN JOINT SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCE DEPARTMENT, NEW SECRETARIAT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA with MJC No.1640 of 2011 SHYAMA NAND CHOUDHARY . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . with MJC No.3312 of 2010 KRISHNA KUMAR SHARMA . Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. . ----------- 3. 27.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. A fresh show cause has been filed today in M.J.C. No. 3312 of 2010. Annexure-D to the same contains a notification No. 118 dated 24.1.2011. The three petitioners whose case were directed to be considered for promotion finds place at Serial Nos. 13, 21 and 26, granting them promotion with effect from 1.4.1995. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that even this belated compliance is incomplete when the monetary benefits are sought to be postponed by Item-5 of the order, to be dealt with separately. Counsel for the State invites the attention of the Court to Paragraph-7 of the show cause filed today that orders for the revised scale will be issued by 31.5.2011. There was no order in the writ petition for grant of monetary benefits consequent to the promotion. But in view of the recitals contained in the order dated 24.1.2011 along with the statement made in the show cause, in order to shorten litigation, when the petitioners may have to file fresh writ application for implementation of that part of the order burdening the Court, the Court considers it proper to direct that once the respondents have taken a decision to grant consequential monetary benefits, this Court records it as a solemn assurance made by them to the Court on oath in a judicial proceeding to pay the actual monetary benefits to the petitioners latest by 31.5.2011. Failure to do so apart from issues of contempt may raise more serious issues of false 3 assurance given to the Court in a judicial proceeding. The contempt applications stand disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)