IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2799 of 2006 AJAY KUMAR SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Devendra Pd. Singh, Adv. For the Opposite parties : Mr. Manoj Kr. Sinha, JC to G.P.I ------------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ---------- Dated, the 17th July, 2008. The petitioner approached this Court for a direction to the respondents for payment of due amount to him towards his daily wages. The writ petition came to be disposed of on 26th July, 2005 by the following order: - “The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents no.9, 10 and 11 to examine the claim of the petitioner and if it is found that his engagement on daily wage basis was made by competent authority in accordance with requirement of work and guideline relating to engagement on daily wage basis and budgetary allocation was available for such appointment then admitted dues payable to the petitioner for the period he has already worked should be paid to him in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of production/communication of a copy of this order. In case the claim of the petitioner is not accepted then reasons in brief should be communicated to him within the aforesaid period and if so advised, petitioner may file a suit for damages and dues of salary against persons who employed and failed to pay his salary on any account.” 2. The petitioner claims that the order dated 26th - 2 - July, 2005 has not been obeyed by opposite party nos.3 and 5 and that necessitated the filing of the present contempt application. 3. Opposite party nos. 3 and 5 have shown cause. It is the specific case of Opposite party no.3, that pursuant to the order of this Court passed on 26th July, 2005, the representation made by the petitioner was considered and it has been disposed of on 10th December, 2005. The office order dated 10th December, 2005 has been placed on record as Annexure-A along with the show-cause of opposite party no.3. 4. Having carefully considered the order of this Court dated 26th July, 2005 and the office order dated 10th December, 2005, we are satisfied that opposite party nos. 3 and 5 cannot be said to have breached the order of this Court. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the office order dated 10th December, 2005, it is for him to assail the same in appropriate proceedings, but surely the opposite parties cannot be held guilty for having committed breach of the order of this Court dated 26th July, 2005. 5. M.J.C. is dismissed accordingly. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J Pawan/-