IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1429 of 2010 1. PANKAJ KUMAR S/O HARINDRA PRASAD SINGH R/O AINWAN, P.O. SAIDABAD, BLOCK KAKO, PANCHAYAT- DAMUHA, P.S.- KAKO, DISTT.- JEHANABAD Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. ZILA PANCHAYAT RAJ PADADHIKARI, JEHANABAD 3. SIRPANCH GRAM KACHHARI DAMUHA, BLOCK- KAKO, DISTT.- JEHANABAD 4. B.D.O. KAKO, JEHANABAD ----------- 05. 27.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and for the opposite parties. A show cause is stated to have been filed on 26.4.2011 which is not on record. Let the office place it on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has still not been reinstated after the termination order had been set aside by this Court. Learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that the petitioner himself has created a piquant situation where the opposite parties are not in a position to implement the order. There was only one vacancy on which respondent no.-2 in the writ petition was working. The petitioner stated that he does not challenge the continuance of respondent no.-2 on the post. The submission therefore is that the order is impossible of compliance because of the stand taken by the petitioner himself, as in absence of vacancy the petitioner cannot be given the benefit of the order. 2 The court upholds the stand of the State. The contempt proceeding stands disposed. P.K. (Navin Sinha, J)