IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2614 of 2010 BRAJNANDAN RAI . Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. . ----------- 3. 20.4.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the opposite parties. The direction in the writ petition was only to consider the claim for revised pay scale as per the recommendation of the Fitment Appellate Committee. A fresh order at Annexure-A to the show cause discloses more complicated facts in so far as the contempt jurisdiction is concerned. The petitioner was appointed as a Moharir in the Consolidation Department prior to 20.12.2000. It would therefore appear that he may be entitled to consideration for the revised pay scale of Moharir with effect from 1.1.1996. He however came to be absorbed as a Revenue Karamchari in the year, 2001. It is submitted that the petitioner is not raising any claim with regard to his pay scale in that light for any period after his absorption. The claim is only for the period he worked as a Moharir. That being a claim not disclosed with clarity in his representation at Annexure-7, when no such enquiry is possible in a 2 contempt petition, if so advised, the petitioner may represent for that limited relief which is expected to be considered by respondent no. 2, in accordance with law preferably within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of such representation. The application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)