IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.831 of 2004 1. Sri Arun Bhushan Prasad S/O Late Umesh Chandra Prasad r/o village Laloo Pokhar, Munger, P.S. Munger, District- Munger, at present posted as District Magistrate Sitamarhi and the then Director Secondary Education, Bihar. Patna 2. Chandra Kishore Singh S/o Late Upendra Nath Singh, R/o Misribagh Colony, P.S. Rupaspur, District- Patna at present posted as Deputy Director Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna ………(Respondent No. 3 and 4 in writ petition) ………..Appellants Versus Sadhana Kumari Singh W/o Sri Vikram Singh, r/o Mohalla Rajputana, Ward No. 10 Dehri- on-Sone, P.S. Dihri-on-Sone, District- Rohtas. ……..(Writ petitioner in writ petition) ………. Repondent (Ist Set) 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Secretary, Department of Primary, Sec.2 Adult Education, New Secretariat, Patna 3. The Director Secondary Education , Deptt. Of Primary, Sec.2 Adult Education, Intermediate Building, Budh Marg, Patna ……..Respondents (IInd Set) ----------------- For the Appellant : Mr. Rajendra Pd. Singh, Sr. Adv. For the State : Mr. Arun Kr. Prasad, AC to G.A.-4 ----------------- 14. 05.08.2011 The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 26.2.2004 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 5761 of 1999 rejecting the show cause filed by the appellants by directing for prosecution on the ground that they have suppressed some facts with reference to the case of respondent Ist set which deals with appointment of the respondent as a teacher. The main order was of another learned Single Judge dated 6.1.2004 in which the learned Single Judge has directed that a show cause be issued to the appellants herein. Accordingly reply was filed to the show cause which was refused by another learned Single Judge by order dated 26.2.2004 as stated above, and directed the Registrar General to engaged a counsel for preparing a complaint and to see that it is filed in the Court of competent jurisdiction with eight weeks from the date of order. Thereafter L.P.A. was filed and stay has been obtained. It is submitted by the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants that even assuming that there is suppression of fact, it is neither willful nor intentional and the facts as reveal from the records have been submitted in the counter affidavit. But, however, learned Senior counsel has submitted that this court may accept the unconditional apology as mentioned in the supplementary affidavit and present L.P.A. may be accepted by this Court. Recording the submission made in the counter affidavit that it is not willful, we accept the apology tendered by the appellants herein. Accordingly, the order dated 26.2.2004 is set aside and the L.P.A. is accordingly allowed. Fahad ( T.Meena Kumari, J. ) ( Vikash Jain, J. )