IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.1255 of 2009 SMT.SUNITA DEVI @ SUNITA KUMARI & ORS . Versus MR.ANUPAM KUMAR . ----------- 3/ 25/08/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submits that in pursuance of the direction of the writ court the representation has been disposed. Alleging non- compliance of the orders of the writ court it is submitted that the disposal of the representation is not in consonance with the law as it is contrary to certain orders of this Court on similar matters. The petitioners appear to have been in an extreme haste for disposal of their writ application. They only sought a direction for disposal of their representation in light of certain orders of this Court. What was the content of the representation or what were the similar orders of the Court, of what nature and in what context was also not considered relevant to be pressed before this Court. A contempt proceeding shall lie only for disobedience of a specific direction given. The direction was to dispose off the representation. That having been done, this Court finds it difficult to proceed any further in - 2 - the contempt jurisdiction. If the petitioners are of the opinion that the disposal of the representation ignores certain specified judgments of this Court, their remedy lies in a fresh writ application. The application is dismissed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)