IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1780 of 2003 PARMANAND PRASAD YADAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Ram Narayan Mahto For the respondents: Mr. Nawal Kishore Singh, SC 6 --- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice And Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal --- Dated, the 8th July, 2008 The petitioner alleges disobedience of the order dated 3rd July, 2003. The relevant portion of the order dated 3rd July, 2003 reads thus: “It is hereby directed that within a period of six weeks from today whatever steps are to be taken by the respondents would be taken and proper orders in favour of all those persons selected by the D.P.C. shall be issued. The respondent no.2, Inspector General of Prisons, Government of Bihar is hereby informed that if this order is not duly complied with within the period aforesaid he will be held personally responsible and may be taken to task.” 2. A supplementary show cause along with affidavit has been filed on behalf of opposite party no.3. Paragraphs 3 & 4 of the supplementary affidavit reads thus: “That it is to be mentioned here that necessary promotion order had already been issued in favour of the petitioner and other persons vide Department order 2 Memo no.2639 dated 28.6.99 well before the order dated 3.7.2003 of the Hon’ble Court in CWJC no.679 of 1999 and a show cause in the instant MJC no.1780 of 2003 has been filed vide Letter No.18303 dated 19.12.2003. That show cause filed by respondent the representation dated 5.9.2003 which is annexure -7 of I.A. filed by the petitioner in MJC no.1780 of 2003 regarding seniority of the petitioner Sri Parrmanand Prasad Yadav is concerned he has also been disposed by a speaking order vide memo no.4002 dated 25.6.2007.” 3. The photo-copy of the order (memo no.4002 dated 25.6.2007) has also been annexed. It transpires that the promotion order has already been issued in favour of the petitioner and other persons. 4. For all these reasons, we are satisfied that nothing further needs to be done in this contempt petition. 5. MJC application is, accordingly, disposed of. R.M. Lodha, CJ. Kishore K. Mandal, J. Neyaz/